AG asked to investigate Surprise City Council’s rule of restricting public comment

Posted on by Yellow Sheet Report Staff

Kavanagh is asking Mayes to launch a probe of the City of Suprise’s public comment policy after a woman was arrested while speaking at a city council meeting on Aug. 20. Rebekah Massie attended the Surprise City Council meeting with her 10-year-old daughter to speak in opposition of a proposal to increase the city attorney’s salary. Near the second hour of the meeting, Massie was speaking before being cut off by Surprise Mayor Skip Hall, who said she had violated the rules for public comment. “Do you want to be escorted out of here?” Hall asked Massie.“Oral communications during the city council meeting may not be used to lodge charges or complaints against any employee of the city or members of the body,” Hall said, reciting the council’s rules for public testimony. Massie replied, “That’s a violation of my First Amendment rights.” Hall asked Massie if she wanted to be escorted out of the building while she repeated that he had violated her rights and acted in an unconstitutional manner. Massie was arrested and subsequently charged with criminal trespass in the third degree for knowingly remaining unlawfully on property after being asked to leave, according to court documents. In response, Massie filed a lawsuit on Wednesday, pushing back against the city and what she calls an “unconstitutional decorum rule.” Massie is a regular attendee of city council meetings, the complaint said, and so is Quintus Schulzke, the second plaintiff. The complaint argues that the city’s criticism policy violates the First Amendment by allowing the removal of speakers not only for actual disturbances but also “simply for speech that officials dislike.” On Tuesday, Kavanagh sent a letter to Mayes formally asking that she investigate the city’s public speaking policy. “It appears to me that the City of Surprise may be violating state statute and our citizens’ fundamental right to free speech by enacting this policy,” Kavanagh said in a prepared statement. “In Arizona statutes, we have a provision that specifically says, ‘[a] public body may make an open call to the public during a public meeting, subject to reasonable time, place and manner restrictions, to allow individuals to address the public body on any issue within the jurisdiction of the public body.’ Protecting freedom of speech, especially in public government settings, is incredibly important to our democracy. Regardless of where they stand, members of the public deserve the opportunity to voice their opinions and concerns to city leaders.”

‘Are we making people leave work … to tell us they’re working?’: Lawmakers take look at TANF

Posted on by Bryan Richardson

Lawmakers on Tuesday said they want the state’s Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program to improve how it verifies recipients are working.

The Legislative Post Audit Committee discussed the issue while receiving two audit reports dealing with programs meant to help low-income Kansans.

Rep. Jason Probst, D-Hutchinson, used his experiences as executive director of Circles of Hope Reno County to relay examples of how the process can work. He said accessing benefits while working can make life “very, very complicated.”

“The places we’re asking them to go to check in to get these benefits are open during business hours, and often they have to take time off work, which then results in them losing their job,” he said. “So we have a system that really doesn’t encourage functional employment.”

Rep. Sean Tarwater, R-Stilwell, asked whether the Legislature needed to address the issue.

“Are we really that inflexible?” he asked. “Are we making people leave work, take time off work to come check in to tell us they’re working?”

The Kansas Department for Children and Families has a contractor reviewing its Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, commonly known as “TANF,” employment service to determine effectiveness, overlaps and service gaps, said Carla Whitehead-Hick, the department’s director of economic and employment services.

“Based on the recommendations from CIA [Change and Innovation Agency], I anticipate some significant changes in how we engage our clients,” she said, adding the report should be complete by the end of September.

Tarwater wondered why the state couldn’t just fix the issue rather than “taking months and months and years to do [so].”

“This clearly has been an issue for a very long time,” he said. “Why are we just now looking at it? Why do we need a report to tell us it’s an issue?”

Whitehead-Hick, who started her role 18 months ago, said she feels like she’s now in a position “to make changes that need to be made if we’re truly committed to serving Kansans.”

Temporary assistance audit

The audit on the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program had a focus on the cash assistance it provides.

Auditors examined two questions:

  • How has the percentage of funding provided directly to families changed over time?
  • What impact have changes to rules since 2011 had on program outcomes?

Auditors reported mixed opinions regarding the second question.

Since 2011, the Legislature passed various rules that reduced families’ total lifetime cash benefit eligibility to 24 months from 60, increased the penalties for work requirement noncompliance and required recipients to complete work skills assessments.

The report said studies across the nation suggested those types of rules have led to mostly negative outcomes, and some data could be seen as positive or negative depending on the viewpoint.

The Foundation for Government Accountability estimated the combined income of 6,000 families leaving the program between October 2011 and March 2015 grew to $67.6 million annually from $19.5 million.

But the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities noted the same data shows the average family would’ve earned $11,100 annually, which is still below the poverty line.

Nine percent of Kansas’ $102 million in federal funding for the program went to cash assistance in fiscal year 2023. Cash assistance represented 15% of spending in fiscal year 2009, but the report said more people received benefits at that point.

The average number of Kansas families receiving benefits monthly dropped to 2,900 in fiscal year 2023 compared to 12,600 in fiscal year 2009.

Sen. Caryn Tyson, R-Parker, expressed concern about the administrative costs, which represented 13% of spending in fiscal year 2023.

“I don’t want to overstep here, but I just think that’s a lot of money to administer this program,” she said.

Whiteside-Hick pointed out that the money includes department salaries as well as administrative costs associated with the 50 programs that the department funds through the block grant.

Rep. Barbara Ballard, D-Lawrence, requested the audit. Auditors didn’t make any recommendations in the report.

Low-income housing audit

Auditors’ review of the low-income housing tax credit revealed that Kansas’ program aligns with the expectations set by federal and state law as well as best practices.

“KHRC [Kansas Housing Resources Corporation] is tasked with ensuring that developers and owners comply with federal and state rules and do all the things they said they would do when they received the credit,” the report said. “Although detailed, KHRC’s compliance process is designed to ensure that federal rules are followed and best practices are implemented.”

The audit sought to answer two questions:

  • How do the corporation’s requirements and monitoring processes for compliance reports, lease approvals, and rent approvals for the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program compare to federal and state law?
  • Are the corporation’s requirements for reserves and land use restrictions covenants consistent across low-income tax credit housing developments?

The program is intended to encourage affordable rental housing through tax credits to offset construction costs. Developers would receive the credits over a 10-year period, subsidizing up to 30% or 70% of construction costs depending on whether the development is new construction or a rehabilitation project.

Auditors identified two requirements — submitting training certificates and completing fair housing activities —  that they didn’t consider a federal or state rule or best practice.

“Although these tasks are unnecessary, they don’t appear to be onerous or unreasonable,” the lead auditor said, using survey results to back up the statement.

Only 1 of 16 developers said completing the fair housing activities was time consuming or costly and 2 out of 15 had the same complaint about submitting training certificates, according to the survey in the audit report.

Bryan Richardson is the managing editor at State Affairs Pro Kansas/Hawver’s Capitol Report. Reach him at [email protected] or on X @RichInNews.

County elections officials brace for longest ballot in nearly 20 years

Posted on by Yellow Sheet Report Staff

The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors heard a presentation from the elections department on Monday to discuss the two-page ballot that voters will face for the general election, along with possible related issues. Maricopa County Executive Director Zach Schira and Elections Director Scott Jarrett warned of the impact a two-page ballot will have on ballot processing, tabulation and voting time. Arizona has not seen a two-page ballot since 2006, Schira noted, which he said emphasizes the need for additional planning and public information efforts. “Obviously, having a two-page ballot is going to impact tabulation time,” Maricopa County BOS Chairman Jack Sellers said. Jarrett said it will take more time to ensure both pages of an individual’s ballot are tabulated. “The two-page ballot has impacted and added bottlenecks into our voting locations,” Jarrett said. The county has expanded the number of voting booths, tabulators and printing stations, he said. The entire second page of the ballot will be composed of only propositions, Jarrett said, and additional voting booths and centers will accommodate the additional time that voters will need to complete their ballot.

Senate hopefuls Lake, Gallego share policies at a business forum

Posted on by Yellow Sheet Report Staff

Lake and Gallego spoke to business leaders today about their policy goals and plans to collaborate across the aisle in a forum hosted by the PHX East Valley Partnership. In opening remarks, Gallego, appearing via Zoom from Washington D.C., highlighted his work on the border, military affairs and past legislative collaborations with Republicans. As for his plan to court corporations to make roots or expand in the state, Gallego noted a need to upkeep the state’s “reliable energy grid” and ensure conservation and creation of water. Gallego pointed to a doomsday hue often cast on the state’s water future, and said “bad news stories create reality.” “These New York Times reporters come, and they have one conversation with one person about water, they write this whole story about how Arizona is running out of it,” Gallego said. “When, in fact, we’re ready to meet the challenges.” In turning to the workforce, Gallego noted a goal to double federal Pell Grants and subsidize apprenticeship programs. Gallego also pointed to his endorsements from 45 Republicans and Independents, as well as from the Arizona Police Association. Lake started her remarks by stressing the need to bring the Senate back into Republican control to prevent the end to the filibuster, which she said would lead to Democrats “stacking the Supreme Court,” making Puerto Rico and D.C. states, walking back Trump tax cuts and keeping the border  “wide open.” Lake then turned to economic development and water, noting she agreed with Gallego on his characterization of water reporting. “You get one nasty story about our water situation, and you get one person who speaks and says we’re in a major crisis situation, it can all of a sudden dampen business opportunities, Lake said. “Businesses that may be thinking of relocating here may recoil a bit.” Lake added she wanted to focus on bringing in new sources of freshwater, desalination and piping in water. In regards to the workforce, Lake said she wanted to see investment in career technical education for high school students. She took a jab at K-12 public education and said, “we need to make sure our K-12 is teaching ABCs and 123s and less adult politics and activism.”  When asked about ensuring education funding, she blamed an alleged increase in administrative pay over teacher pay and lauded charter schools, the state’s school choice program and competition in education. In addition, she addressed her plan to collaborate across the aisle. She said the “fake news” paints her as “extreme,” but she dubbed herself a “negotiator,” and said she “absolutely can work with people with varying political opinions.” Though, she said in looking at national security or law enforcement, for example,, “there are also times when you have to draw a red line.”

Kobach: ‘Hostile judges’ a result of flawed judicial selection process

Posted on by Matt Resnick

Attorney General Kris Kobach on Friday publicly accused Kansas Supreme Court justices of exerting hostility from the bench while also calling for reform of the state’s judicial selection process.

“Two words are dominating my thoughts about the upcoming election and [they’re] not ‘Donald Trump,’” Kobach said. “It’s about what we face in the Attorney General’s Office, and that is ‘hostile judges.’” 

Kobach’s blistering critique, delivered during a ceremonial opening of the Shawnee County Republican Party’s temporary headquarters in downtown Topeka, centered on the state’s Supreme Court Nominating Commission and his desire for a constitutional amendment that would usher in a new selection process. 

Kobach contended that the commission, tasked with recommending the appointments of qualified individuals for the Kansas Supreme Court and the state’s Court of Appeals, is stacked with practicing attorneys that occupy five of the 9 seats — including the committee chair, who is elected by lawyers statewide. 

“The majority of the judicial selection commission is voted on by lawyers,” Kobach said, while also asserting that “attorneys are disproportionately on the left end of the political spectrum and it’s reflected in the justices we get.” 

Kobach said the nominating process has led to the “most progressive” state supreme court in the nation. But the only way potential reform can happen, he said, is if Republicans either maintain or build upon their supermajorities in the House and Senate so that it can wield a veto-proof majority. 

“We absolutely have to have a constitutional amendment to change that [process],” Kobach said. “And the only way that is possible is if certain senators and House of Representative candidates in the state Legislature get across the line.”  

Under Kansas’ “merit-based” judicial selection process, the nominating commission vets candidates and forwards its recommendations to the governor for consideration. Kobach also said the Legislature was considering introducing a constitutional amendment last session, but House leadership determined they were a vote or two shy of passage. 

“But they thought they had the votes in the Senate,” he said. 

In 2022, Senate President Ty Masterson, R-Andover, proposed amendments that would have altered the decades-old selection process — one of which would have placed Supreme Court judges on the statewide ballot. Prior to that, Masterson pursued another alternative plan that entailed a Senate confirmation process. Those measures encountered turbulence and the merit-based process marched on. 

At the conclusion of Monday’s Legislative Coordinating Council meeting, both Masterson and House Speaker Dan Hawkins, R-Wichita, said they’ve not had any discussion with Kobach pertaining to the introduction of a constitutional amendment during the 2025 session if the GOP maintains its tight grip on both chambers. But Masterson did indicate he might be open to the possibility “if the climate is right.” 

“I’ve been considering it my entire career, because we have the least democratic way of selecting [judges],”Masterson said. 

Hawkins added, “The last time we had that vote — which has not been that many years ago — we came up significantly short.”

“This is the Attorney General giving his talk,” Hawkins said. “He’s not talking for us.” 

Senate Minority Leader Dinah Sykes, D-Lenexa, said she is opposed to reform of the selection process, pointing to the so-called “triple play scandal” that rocked the state government in 1956. The sequence of events unfolded with incumbent Gov. Fred Hall being dispatched in his reelection bid — and then plotting with his lieutenant governor to appoint Hall to a vacant Supreme Court post.

House Minority Leader Vic Miller, D-Topeka, said “it’s easy for Kobach to make those types of statements but very difficult to provide hard evidence” that change is necessary. 

“I bet if you pressed him on it, he couldn’t cite that his position was related to anything but abortion,” Miller said. 

During Kobach’s remarks on Friday, he cited abortion as an existential issue affecting the lives of many. One recent ruling that rankled Kobach was the Supreme Court’s near unanimous decision to strike down abortion-related restrictions. 

Miller said he’s “fine” with the merit-based system, and that placing judges on ballots for a statewide election is a path the state doesn’t want to travel down. 

“I think we have highly qualified justices that are a result of the system we have,” he said. “I can’t imagine a scenario where judges are elected, because I don’t think people in those positions should be motivated by what’s popular.” 

He also said that he’s OK with lawyers “having a heavy hand” in the review and nomination process.

“Because the attorneys understand the underlying principles that justices in this case are supposed to operate under without fear of political retribution,” he said. 

In an interview with State Affairs Friday, Kobach said another reason the judicial selection process is flawed is because it lacks accountability. Since taking office in January 2019, Kelly has appointed three of the Supreme Court’s seven justices — and six of the 14 judges presiding over the Court of Appeals. 

“You can’t hold [Gov. Laura Kelly] accountable when she’s given three names and she has to choose three names,” Kobach said. “You can’t blame or credit her for the appointment of a judge because it didn’t come fully from her.” 

Kobach also asserted that some of his “victories” have been by narrow margins when he believes the outcome would have been “a slam dunk” if argued in front of other high courts. He pointed to a 4-3 decision in favor of a signature verification law he argued for. 

“I was really happy that we won a 4-3 decision, but I think in most other states that would have been a 7-0 decision,” he said. “And so you have these cases on the margin that could go either way. And the tilt of the court makes it very difficult for what should be a very easy win when you’re defending a state law like that.” 

He circled back to the topic of abortion. 

“Where the leaning of the court is so aggressively to the left — that makes it almost impossible for one side to present its legal argument with any hope of winning,” he said. “So it begs the question, ‘What’s the reason our court has such a leftward tilt?’ — especially given the politics of our state, which has Republican supermajorities. And the only answer is our method of selecting justices.”

The merit-based selection process, Kobach said, doesn’t actually have much merit at all. 

“Ironically, it was promoted as a nonpartisan merit-based selection system,” he said. “But what it has done is push the partisanship behind closed doors. So instead of an open debate in the Capitol about a justice, it’s a closed-debate among commission members. 

“And in terms of being merit-based, I don’t think there is any evidence that it produces superior merit than the other systems around the country.”

Matt Resnick is a statehouse reporter at State Affairs Pro Kansas/Hawver’s Capitol Report. Reach him at [email protected]

Indiana lawmakers revisit ending statute of limitations for Level 3 felony rape and child molestation

Posted on by Jarred Meeks

State lawmakers on Tuesday heard testimony for and against legislation that would remove Indiana’s statute of limitations for Level 3 felony rape and child molestation offenses.

Earlier this year, state lawmakers considered Senate Bill 151, legislation that, as it left the Senate, would have allowed prosecution of Level 3 felony rape and child molestion offenses to be commenced at any time. The bill unanimously passed out of the Senate but stalled in the House Committee on Courts and Criminal Code.

State lawmakers are weighing whether to revisit the bill’s language during the 2025 legislative session.

Sen. Michael Crider, R-Greenfield, who was added as a second author of the bill in January, said during a Tuesday meeting of the Interim Study Committee on Corrections and Criminal Code that the legislation would simply extend the time prosecutors “with sufficient evidence” have to bring charges. He emphasized that the bill would not lower the burden of proof for such charges.

“The mental trauma that is inflicted at the same time the criminal act is happening is so dramatic that there are many, many reasons why a victim may not report at that particular time,” Crider said.

Indiana has no limitations for Class A and Level 1 and 2 felonies, unless it is child molesting, said Joel Wieneke, senior staff attorney for the Indiana Public Defender Council. There is also no statute of limitations for murder.

The state has a five-year statute of limitations for all other felonies, with several exceptions, including in instances when DNA evidence is discovered and when sex offenses are committed against children, Wieneke said. One of the exceptions is for several sex crimes — primarily those against children — and allows the alleged victim to pursue legal action until they turn 31.

Wieneke argued the statute of limitations encourages victims to come forward and the state to be diligent in investigating their accusations.

“We don’t have much empathy for individuals who have truly committed these offenses, but the reality is there will be some people who are accused of committing these offenses who did not,” Wieneke said. “And through the passage of time, fading of memories, it becomes even more and more hard for an individual to defend themselves from such allegations.”

The Indiana Public Defender Council particularly fears state lawmakers might eventually do away with the statute of limitations for all Level 3 felonies if it first does so with felonies outlined in this year’s Senate Bill 151.

“If we take away the statute of limitations for these specific Level 3 felonies, it could create a slippery slope and lead to the abolition of statutes of limitations in other serious crimes that are similarly prosecuted, oftentimes based upon the uncorroborated testimony of one witness,” Wieneke said.

Multiple women who said they were victims of sexual assault testified in support of the bill’s language Tuesday.

Courtney Curtis, assistant executive director for the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council, said such legislation would not “open the floodgates” as some claim, citing prosecutors’ responsibility to only bring forward charges they think they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

“This doesn’t change what a prosecutor evaluates when he or she is looking at a case and deciding whether to file those charges,” Curtis said. “It merely just allows us to do so if the case is strong enough to be handled in a court of law.”

Asked whether a balance could be struck between the opposing sides, Curtis pointed to this year’s House Bill 1052 as a possible solution. The legislation would have allowed the prosecution of Level 1 and Level 2 felony sex offenses to be commenced at any time. The bill never left the House Committee on Courts and Criminal Code.

Contact Jarred Meeks on X @jarredsmeeks or email him at [email protected].

Judge rules Health Department can withhold abortion reports

Posted on by Tom Davies

A Marion County judge has sided with the Indiana Department of Health in a lawsuit seeking to force the agency to resume releasing individual abortion reports filed by doctors — setting up the start of likely appeals to higher courts.

The anti-abortion group Voices for Life filed the lawsuit against the Health Department in May, arguing that the terminated pregnancy reports are disclosable under the Indiana Access to Public Records Act. 

The department had released those reports for many years before the state public access counselor found in a December 2023 opinion that those reports should be regarded as private medical records.

That opinion came a few months after the state’s near-total abortion ban took effect.

Judge agrees reports qualify as medical records

Superior Court Judge Timothy Oakes on Tuesday granted a request from the Health Department’s attorneys that the lawsuit be dismissed. 

Oakes wrote his two-page order that “we have a clear Congressional and legislative intent to protect medical information.”

Oakes signaled that he didn’t expect his decision to settle the question of whether the reports should be released.

“This Court is not persuaded that the law, as written, makes the Termination of Pregnancy Reports (“TPRs”) public records,” Oakes wrote. “Plaintiff may very well find relief in an appellate Court’s analysis or, more likely, at the Indiana legislature. This Court simply makes its decision on the statutory language … after its own analysis of the legislative history, the statutes as written, the legal briefs of both sides, and oral argument.”

Anti-abortion group considering appeal

South Bend-based Voices for Life, represented in court by the conservative Thomas More Society legal group, said it sought the reports to evaluate whether doctors who perform abortions in Indiana were complying with the law.

The reports do not include the patient’s name but have information such as the patient’s age, marital status, race, education and the date and location of the abortion.

The Thomas More Society told State Affairs an appeal was under consideration.

“In our view, once a patient’s identity has been removed from a medical record, the record is no longer a ‘patient medical record’ as defined in Indiana’s access to public records law, but simply medical data,” the group said in a statement. “For many years before its last December about-face, the Department of Health interpreted the law this way and granted public access to Terminated Pregnancy Reports. For the protection of Indiana citizens, it should continue to do so.”

Wells denounces Rokita’s involvement in dispute

The group’s lawsuit was filed less than three weeks after  Attorney General Todd Rokita released an opinion that the individual abortion reports are not medical records and can be released to the public.

Rokita seemed to invite legal action against the Health Department by saying during an April news conference that individuals “have the right” to sue the state if the agency refused public requests for copies of the reports.

Rokita’s opinion contrasted with that of Indiana Public Access Counselor Luke Britt, who found that the reports are tantamount to medical records and “should be withheld from disclosure in their entirety.” He and others fear the reports could be “reverse engineered to identify patients — especially in smaller communities.” 

The number of abortions performed in the state has dropped by more than 95% under the restrictions to fewer than four per week, according to the Health Department’s aggregate reports.

Rokita’s office said it stands by its opinion that the terminated pregnancy reports should be made public.

“Sufficient patient information should be redacted to protect patient privacy AND records should be released in furtherance of the legislature’s intent,” the office said in a statement to State Affairs.

The Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission directed Rokita in July to respond to a professional misconduct grievance filed by a lawyer who argued that Rokita had a responsibility to defend the Health Department in court and his remarks were a “breach of trust” by taking a legal position adverse to the department.

The commission has taken no action on that grievance.

Democrat Destiny Wells, who is challenging Rokita in the November election, said Rokita was using the dispute for political purposes.

“The dismissal of this case is a win for medical privacy,” Wells said in a statement. “Hoosiers are done with Todd Rokita’s blatant waste of taxpayer dollars.”

Update: This story has been updated to include comment from the Attorney General’s Office.

Tom Davies is a Statehouse reporter for State Affairs Pro Indiana. Reach him at [email protected] or on X at @TomDaviesIND.

Schwab demands answers from USPS over ‘unacceptable’ mail ballot issues

Posted on by Brett Stover

Secretary of State Scott Schwab wants answers from the U.S. Postal Service over ballot delivery issues during this year’s August primary election.

About 1,000 ballots — mailed before election day — were received either without a postmark or after the three-day grace period, Schwab said in a letter sent Monday to Postmaster General Louis DeJoy. Those votes couldn’t be counted under Kansas law.

“It is unacceptable that voters, who follow the rules for requesting, voting, and returning their mail ballot, are disenfranchised by the USPS because ballots that were properly and timely mailed were delivered without a postmark or not at all,” Schwab said in the letter.

Although Postal Service policy calls to postmark all ballots, Schwab said local postal clerks told election offices they were blocked from postmarking ballots “even if the envelope was clearly shown to have been in USPS custody and delivered to the election office within the statutory deadlines.”

That issue, coupled with delays in delivery, meant that 2% of the 18% of Kansans who voted by mail didn’t see their ballots counted during the August primary.

Schwab called the Postal Service’s problems “unacceptable” and requested DeJoy explain how the service will ensure all ballots are properly postmarked and delivered within the three-day grace period during the November general election.

“Kansas has had mail voting in some form since the Civil War, but never has a lack of confidence in the delivery of our ballot been questioned as it has in the 21st Century,” he said.

The Postal Service said it delivered 99.89% of ballots within seven days during the 2020 general election, and 99.93% within that time frame in 2022.

But Kansas’ three day window to accept ballots — established by the Legislature in 2017 — accelerates the deadline. In the last two legislative sessions, some Republican lawmakers have tried unsuccessfully to eliminate the grace period entirely.

The U.S. Postal Service did not respond to a request for comment on Schwab’s letter. In an August news release, the agency reiterated its commitment to providing secure and timely delivery of ballots and other election-related mail.“

We understand the critical role we play in the democratic process, and we are resolute in our efforts to secure the delivery of ballots and all Election Mail,” Brendan Donahue, assistant inspector in charge, said in the release. “We are committed to ensuring the safe and secure delivery of Election Mail to and from voters.”

Brett Stover is a Statehouse reporter at State Affairs Pro Kansas/Hawver’s Capitol Report. Reach him at [email protected] or on X @BrettStoverKS.

Holcomb’s former press secretary joins Purdue media staff

Posted on by Tom Davies

Gov. Eric Holcomb’s former press secretary, Erin Murphy, has joined Purdue University as senior director for media and public relations.

Murphy, whose last day in the governor’s office was Friday, spent three years as press secretary. She began Monday at Purdue, where she will report to Julie Rosa, the school’s vice president of communications, and work closely with Purdue President Mung Chiang and other top officials, the university announced Tuesday.

Murphy will be Purdue’s primary news media spokesperson and lead the university’s media and public relations teams.

“Her background in communication and media strategy will be instrumental in advancing Purdue’s key initiatives,” Rosa said in a statement about Murphy.

Lauren Houck, who has been Holcomb’s communications director, will add handling news media matters to her role in the governor’s office.

Houck has worked in the governor’s office since 2022, after having communications roles with the Indiana Housing and Community Development Authority and the state attorney general’s office under Curtis Hill and Todd Rokita.

Tom Davies is a Statehouse reporter for State Affairs Pro Indiana. Reach him at [email protected] or on X at @TomDaviesIND.

GOP lawmaker’s ‘Pretty Girls Vote Republican’ cap has Democrats seeing red

Posted on by Andy Sher

State Rep. Greg Martin, a Hixson Republican seeking reelection to the House District 26 in November, has Democrats seething over his social media post in which he poses with a group of adult women sporting his red campaign ball cap declaring “Pretty Girls Vote Republican.”

“I met with a number of women today that support my re-election effort,” Martin wrote in the post on X. “Those that have given to my campaign or volunteer in other ways can get one of these super cool hats for free. DM if you want a ‘Pretty Girls Vote Republican’ hat.”

It included a photo of Martin, who has a doctoral degree from New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, posing with adult women who wore the caps. His hashtag was #VoteRed.

Martin, a real estate agent, faces writer Allison Gorman, a progressive Democrat, in the conservative district. As of Tuesday morning, 23,000 people had viewed his post. 

“Don’t call women girls, don’t insult our intelligence & don’t pretend you’ve done anything to improve the lives of women in TN,” wrote @ChattyWendy423 on X. “So glad that @AllisonGormanTN is running for your seat. Unlike you, she will advocate for policies that will help women in our state.”

Tennessee Blue accused Martin of having “something seriously wrong.”

“Go outside and touch some grass. Y’all messed around for two years and you’re about to find out how pissed off women are in TN,” the group posted. “Btw only a pervert would put girls on their hats and not women.”

“Dude. So weird, so creepy,” weighed in @PetMcKinney.

In 2022, Gorman ran and lost against Martin. Her daughter, Meg Gorman, challenged U.S. Rep. Chuck Fleischmann in the state’s 3rd Congressional District, losing to him a second time.

Martin formerly served as  the District 3 member of the Hamilton County Board of Education. He resigned his seat in 2016 after he was elected to the Hamilton County Commission. Commissioners appointed him to the District 26 seat in spring 2022 to replace Robin Smith, a Hixson Republican, former state GOP Party chair and political campaign vendor. Smith resigned from the seat after pleading guilty in federal court to a public corruption charge. 

The furtive effort involved Smith and others contracting with vendor Phoenix Solutions to provide mail and consulting services for some GOP lawmakers that were paid out of the members’ taxpayer-funded constituent mail and communications accounts. Smith and others claimed falsely that Phoenix Solutions was operated by an experienced political consultant named “Matthew Phoenix.” 

Smith is cooperating with the U.S. Attorney’s office in the bribery and kickback case against former state House Speaker Glen Casada, R-Franklin, and his onetime top aide Cade Cothren. The trial is scheduled to begin Nov. 6.

Your search query contained invalid characters or was empty. Please try again with a valid query.