Glitching: State agencies falter on software implementation projects

State agencies lagging behind schedule and over budget on projects was an emerging theme during this week’s Joint Committee on Information Technology meeting. 

Directly after receiving word that a Statehouse security project was roughly a year behind schedule, the committee was informed of myriad issues tied to software implementation projects for the Kansas Department for Children and Families and the Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services.

Child support services

Tom Pagano, chief information officer for both agencies, updated the committee on progress pertaining to the children and families department’s Child Support Services System initiative. 

The initial timeline for the project was 28 months, but Pagano told the committee it’s projected to take 41 months while also $1 million over its original $11.7 million budget. The project centers on the conversion of the agency’s network mainframe to newer technology on a Microsoft platform, Pagano said, adding that state and federal funding is split evenly for the project. 

Pagano said the biggest setback involved a “surprise” federal mandate from the Office of Child Support Services requiring “de-identification” or concealment of personal information during the migration process. 

“That caused a significant delay because we had to retool in a number of ways to make that happen, and that’s what added seven extra months to the project,” he said. “It also added additional costs to the tune of about $1 million.”

Pagano also pinned blame on project subcontractor Modern Systems, which he said had difficulty handling “a tremendous amount of complicated data” during the conversion process. Some of that related to bandwidth issues, as well as insufficient staffing by the subcontractor, according to Pagano.

He said IBM’s recent purchase of Modern Systems “added another wrinkle” to the project, and he now anticipates it being fully completed by January 2025. Rep. Barb Wasinger, R-Hays, pressed Pagano over “any hiccups” in receiving timely child support payments because of the timeline delays. Pagano indicated he is not intimately involved in the agency’s business “space.” He said someone present in the room could shed light on Wasinger’s question, but nobody spoke up. 

“No one seems to be wanting to save you on this answer,” Wasinger said. 

Pagano said he made multiple “major” decisions resulting in a reset of the project’s timeline. The first, he said, was opening a more transparent line of communication with project contractor Conduent, involving increased “face-to-face” dialogue. Pagano also said he “reorganized the way” the agencies conducted projects, which included retooling of the agencies’ leadership teams. 

Alex Wong, chief information technology architect for the Office of Technology Services, told the committee that a project’s variance for change often correlates with the scope of the project. 

“As projects become smaller, there are not as many requirements,” he said. 

Health care records

A software “modernization” project tied to the Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services is $3 million over its original $2.5 million budget and isn’t expected to be wrapped until January 2025, or possibly by December. 

The project’s scope includes the implementation of an electronic health care records database and substance abuse disorder module for each of the state’s four mental health facilities  via contractor WellSky. Pagano said the “vast majority” of the $3 million in excess costs went to licensing fees and corresponding interfaces pertaining to the purchase of a missing “pharmacy module” that was not included in the original deal with WellSky. 

Pagano added that the project proved difficult to execute because infrastructure within the hospitals was “suboptimal.” 

“In other words, the wireless [infrastructure] was not present in some areas of the hospital,” he said. “Older facilities have a lot of issues that need to be remedied, so we put into place a plan to attack all that infrastructure.”

Those issues caused Pagano to rework the project’s parameters while also addressing staffing needs necessary to complete the work. Parsons State Hospital and Training Center, Pagano said, is nearing implementation of the WellSky system,  while the software should be live at the other hospitals by December. 

“It didn’t quite start off the way we hoped, but I think it’s ending on a very good note,” Pagano said. 

Committee Vice Chair Rep. Kyle Hoffman, R-Coldwater, congratulated Pagano for the work and brushed off the new $5.5 million cost-estimate, which is covered by state funding. 

“It seems to me there wasn’t enough [of an] initial look at what needed to be done before it was started,” he said. 

Hoffman also commended Pagano for getting the project “on schedule,” contradicting Pagano’s earlier comment to the committee that the project was three months behind. In addition, Hoffman questioned whether WellSky was the best contractor for the job.

“I just hope that going forward, all the agencies look at everything before they jump into an RFP [request for proposal],” he said, and avoid being told, “‘Oh, we’ll fix that later.’” 

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

Note: The story has been updated to reflect that Rep. Kyle Hoffman is the committee’s vice chair. Sen. Mike Petersen is the committee chair

Judge keeps block on voter harassment provisions of the EPM 

A Maricopa County Superior Court judge kept provisions of the EPM detailing behaviors associated with voter harassment and intimidation enjoined, despite a request from Mayes and Fontes for a stay while they appealed the decision. Judge Jennifer Ryan-Touhill, a Brewer appointee, deemed guidance on voter harassment an infringement on free speech, in line with an argument from the Arizona Free Enterprise Club and the America First Policy Institute. Following the ruling, Mayes and Fontes filed for a stay while they appealed and claimed the relief to be “premature and too broad” and result in confusion for election workers. Ryan-Touhill opted to keep her order in place and found Arizona law already provides the protections sought after in the blocked provisions of the EPM. “It is not this Court’s duty to parcel through the EPM to analyze every phase that does or does not comply with hypotheticals propounded by Defendants. The Court is instead tasked with the duty of analyzing the laws and facts provided; this is what this Court did,” Ryan-Touhill wrote. “Moreover, the Court is not persuaded that Plaintiffs’ ‘argument about the Free Speech Clause rings hollow … The Court reiterates its prior finding: ‘[I]t is always in the public interest to prevent the violation of a party’s constitutional rights.”

Gov sings solar praises ahead of ACC hearing on APS’ fee

Hobbs is encouraging Arizonans to install solar panels on their houses to save money on their utility bills at the same time a utility company is attempting to charge solar customers for those panels. At a Thursday event promoting the Biden administration’s Federal Home Energy Rebates Program, Hobbs spoke about Solar for All – another Biden program – and encouraged Arizonans to use incentives from that initiative and others to install clean energy forms like rooftop solar. However, Arizona Public Service is hoping to defend its plan to charge solar users an additional monthly fee at an October hearing. The Arizona Corporation Commission originally approved the plan as part of an APS rate case, but has agreed to reconsider the solar fee after advocacy groups and the attorney general filed for a rehearing. Speaking to reporters after Thursday’s event, Hobbs acknowledged that fees can make rooftop solar panels less attractive to homeowners, but said the issue is “a whole other can of worms that I don’t want to get into today.” The APS solar hearing is scheduled for Oct. 28 and public comment has begun to pour in. Dozens of consumers have submitted comments in opposition to the fee in just the last week after APS sent a notice to ratepayers about the hearing.

Commerce department denies former official’s claims of improper pandemic aid

The Kansas Department of Commerce on Thursday denied the claims of a now-deceased former official who said he had steered pandemic aid at the behest of Lt. Gov. David Toland.

Jonathan Clayton, who was found dead in his wrecked pickup truck on Sunday, worked for the department from 2020 to 2023, ending as economic recovery director.

Clayton alleged Toland, who also serves as commerce secretary, created a scheme to alter the recipients of the Building a Stronger Economy grant, according to an email purported to be from Clayton that was sent to various officials after his disappearance on Aug. 3.

The email claimed that round’s grants were steered to the districts of Senate President Ty Masterson, R-Andover, and then-House Speaker Ron Ryckman Jr. The Kansas City Star reported that Masterson denied the claim.

“Clayton’s allegations of wrongdoing by the Department of Commerce related to the awarding of BASE grants, along with his allegation that he was forced to serve on a volunteer theatre board, are categorically false,” the department said in a statement.

The Peabody Gazette-Bulletin in July reported on Clayton’s previous felony convictions for finance crimes. Clayton had most recently worked as interim city clerk in Peabody.

The commerce department said it was not aware of Clayton’s felony convictions, pointing to existing state law as a reason it couldn’t perform “national level criminal background checks for the position that Clayton held.”

“Our process for vetting prospective employees included online searches, social media reviews and reference checks, which unfortunately failed to uncover his felony convictions,” the statement said. “He would not have been hired by Commerce had we been aware of these convictions.”

Gov. Laura Kelly told reporters Wednesday that an outside investigator is reviewing Kansas’ awarding of federal pandemic aid.

The department referred to the investigation “as an extra precaution” in its statement.

Will Lawrence, Kelly’s chief of staff, clarified that the investigation will involve any grants that Clayton was involved in. Lawrence also defended Toland in a statement Thursday.

“Lieutenant Governor Toland has conducted himself at the highest ethical standards throughout his entire career and has brought important reforms to the Kansas Department of Commerce, including the creation of the incentive transparency database, strong incentive clawback policies, and strict reporting requirements for all programs,” he said. “He has worked to bring more, not less, accountability to the agency.”

Lawrence said Kelly and Toland would pursue changes to the background check statutes in the upcoming session.

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

National Dems highlight 10 races to break up GOP supermajority

Kansas Democrats are looking to gain at least three Senate seats and two House seats to break a GOP supermajority in the Legislature, and the national party has identified a potential path for that goal.

The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee on Thursday revealed 10 “spotlight” races, mostly looking toward the Kansas City area with seven candidates from the metro.

The races include four in the Senate and six in the House (Democrats listed first):

  • Senate District 5 — Sen. Jeff Pittman, D-Leavenworth, vs. Jeff Klemp of Lansing
  • Senate District 10 — Andrew Mall of Shawnee vs. Sen. Mike Thompson, R-Shawnee
  • Senate District 11 — Karen Thurlow of Stilwell vs. Sen. Kellie Warren, R-Leawood
  • Senate District 23 — Stacey Knoell of Olathe vs. Rep. Adam Thomas, R-Olathe
  • House District 15 — Rep. Allison Hougland, D-Olathe, vs. Lauren Bohi of Olathe
  • House District 39 — Vanessa Vaughn West of Shawnee vs. Rep. Angela Stiens, R-Shawnee
  • House District 41 — Aimee Bateman of Leavenworth vs. Rep. Pat Proctor, R-Leavenworth
  • House District 52 — Jacquie Lightcap of Topeka vs. Rep. Jesse Borjon, R-Topeka
  • House District 88 — Veronica Gillette of Wichita vs. Rep. Sandy Pickert of Wichita
  • House District 102 — Rep. Jason Probst of Hutchinson vs. Kyler Sweely of Hutchinson

Committee President Heather Williams said in a news release that the 10 races represented the best opportunities to hold and flip seats to break the supermajority.

“As the DLCC works to strengthen Democratic power across the country, we’re proud to champion these Kansas Democrats and their fight for restoring balance in the legislature,” she said.

The DLCC — the arm of the Democratic Party focused on state legislatures — planned to invest $10 million into races in eight states, including Kansas, with a goal of spending $60 million across the nation, NBC News reported in June.

Sam Paisley, the committee’s interim communications director, told State Affairs the candidates gaining access to infrastructure support and a team of experts is a big aspect of Thursday’s announcement. She said there isn’t a specific amount of funding that candidates will receive.

“We stay in touch with the candidates as we go into November to see what their needs are,” she said.

Paisley said the committee is selecting 180 candidates across the country, so choosing 10 in Kansas shows the importance the DLCC placed on breaking the two-thirds majority.

Republican leaders did not immediately respond to State Affairs’ request for comment.

During the session, Kansas Republicans had 85 representatives and 29 senators, just over the supermajority thresholds of 84 and 27, respectively. Under a supermajority, Republicans can overcome Gov. Laura Kelly’s vetoes by simply maintaining the party line.

Both chambers have been under a GOP supermajority since the 2010 election, when Republican membership grew to 92 from 76. Republicans have maintained a two-thirds majority in the Senate since the 1996 election.

The 2014 election represented the peak of the trend, with Kansas electing 97 Republican representatives to join 31 GOP senators.

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

Ethics Commission goes behind closed doors to consider complaint against education commissioner

Members of the Tennessee Ethics Commission went behind closed doors Thursday to consider an ethics complaint filed by state Rep. Caleb Hemmer against Education Commissioner Lizzette Reynolds. 

The Nashville Democrat has alleged Reynolds twice illegally accepted travel reimbursements from ExcelinEd, a pro-voucher group that Reynolds once worked for.

Bill Young, executive director of the Bureau of Ethics and Campaign Finance, told the Tennessee Journal afterwards he could not discuss the matter. While Young had initially suggested the executive session would be brief, the panel ended up discussing the matter for more than 40 minutes.

Three of the panel’s six members attended in person and one by telephone. Two others were absent.

“We’re in a difficult situation because the statute on sworn complaints filed by an individual, including Rep. Hemmer, requires both me, staff and the Ethics Commission to keep all that information confidential until the commission decides to make a decision to dismiss or refer to the Attorney General’s office or take some other action,” Young said.

“So until that happens, I cannot comment,” he added.

Hemmer, meanwhile, also sharply criticized Gov. Bill Lee’s chief legal counsel, Erin Merrick, for what he said her her “glossing over key facts in her effort to clean up” for what he characterized as Reynolds’ “continued malfeasance and failure of leadership at the Tennessee Department of Education.”

In a letter to Merrick, the Nashville Democrat said Reynolds is in “violation” of state code as well as Republican Gov. Bill Lee’s Executive Order 2 implementing a “comprehensive” ethics policy to maintain “trust” in state government. 

At issue is Reynolds acceptance of free travel from ExcelinEd, which employs a lobbyist in Tennessee to promote the expansion of school vouchers. Lee is a vocal proponent, but he was been stymied in trying to get vouchers through the GOP-led General Assembly, including a failed effort just this year. 

In his first year in office, the governor did succeed in squeezing through a voucher program limited to Metro Nashville and Shelby County school systems, though the heavy-handed leadership of House Speaker Glen Casada in ushering through the bill’s narrow passage contributed to his downfall from the leadership position after the session ended. Hamilton County was added to the existing voucher program last year.

Hemmer said the information he provided “will clearly show that Commissioner Lizzette Reynolds is in violation of Tennessee Code Annotated 3-6-305(a) and Executive Order No. 2. Unfortunately, Ms. Merrick is glossing over key facts in her effort to clean up after the Commissioner’s continued malfeasance and failure of leadership at the Tennessee Department of Education.”

Hemmer said that while Reynolds has “voluntarily” repaid monies associated with the travel, that’s not good enough. Hemmer also criticized Reynolds earlier this year after the Tennessee Education Association and others said she did not meet the state’s education requirements for being commissioner.

Reynolds later began taking classes to move her toward teacher certification. But that too created controversy because she was technically not qualified for a state stipend because she had not been a resident of the state for at least six months. She ultimately paid the money back.0

Opinion: Lugar converted swords to plowshares

INDIANAPOLIS — Covering the 1996 presidential campaign of Indiana U.S. Sen. Richard G. Lugar, I found him talking with students in a Drake University classroom a few days before the Iowa caucuses. As I prepared to enter, a couple of national reporters were exiting, shaking their heads.

“Can you believe that?” one said. “He’s talking about Africa.”

The unsuccessful Lugar presidential campaign was a cerebral diversion. While some candidates offered up the same scripted talking points over and over again, Sen. Lugar tended to offer remarks aimed at specific audiences. And one of them was what would become the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR).

PEPFAR was supported by Lugar and then-Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Joe Biden (the two rotated in that position) and signed into law by President George W. Bush. Prior to PEPFAR, only about 50,000 people in sub-Saharan Africa had been receiving lifesaving anti-retroviral drugs. That quickly grew to 1.4 million. And a generation later, PEPFAR has been credited with saving more than 20 million lives in Africa.

Or as Lugar put it, “We should understand that our investments in disease prevention programs have yielded enormous foreign policy benefits during the last five years. PEPFAR has helped to prevent instability and societal collapse in a number of at-risk countries. 

“In my judgment,” he continued, “the dollars spent on this program can be justified purely on the basis of the humanitarian results that we have achieved. But the value of this investment clearly extends to our national security and to our national reputation.”

On Sept. 3, a little more than five years after Lugar passed away at age 87, many of his colleagues and constituents will gather outside Gainbridge Fieldhouse for the unveiling of a monument in his honor. Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will give the keynote, and there will be video commemorations from President Bush and former Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn.

The Richard Lugar monument will pay homage to one of the most influential politicians in Indiana history, who received more votes than any other Hoosier. The statue will be installed later in the day in its permanent location at Lugar Plaza on the south side of the City-County Building where, as mayor, Lugar orchestrated the pivotal era that launched modern Indianapolis. 

After winning the mayor’s office in 1967, he ushered in the “Unigov” era that combined many functions of Indianapolis and Marion County. In 1979, he played a major role in saving Chrysler Corp., which employed 17,170 Hoosiers at the time. 

While he was chairman and then ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, his most important legacy came with the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction program, which deactivated 7,500 Soviet and Russian strategic nuclear warheads and destroyed more than 1,400 land- and submarine-launched ballistic missiles after the collapse of the Soviet Union. 

Nunn and Lugar had discovered Soviet nuclear and chemical weapon depots protected by chain-link fences and padlocks, housed in chicken coop-style buildings with light streaming through their holey roofs. Shells filled with sarin gas or smuggled highly enriched uranium would have been coveted by terrorists like Osama bin Laden and ISIS. The program found new jobs for former Soviet physicists and upgraded security for weapons of mass destruction sites.

The Lugar monument was a five-year project of Jim Morris’, Mayor Lugar’s chief of staff who would later head the United Nations’ World Food Programme. That was another frequent topic that Lugar (who also chaired the Senate Agriculture Committee) would broach: hunger and feeding the world.

Upon Lugar’s death, then-Gleaners Food Bank of Indiana President John Elliott observed, “Lugar fought creatively for the 1 in 8 Americans who are food insecure. He tirelessly defended the School Lunch Program, including the critical Child Nutrition Reauthorization in 1998, which provides 1 in 5 meals to hungry Hoosier families even today.”

Did Morris get to see the Lugar monument before he died unexpectedly last month?

Charlie Richardson, an Indianapolis attorney who helped plan the privately funded $500,000 monument project, said, “He was on this daily.” Richardson, who last spoke with Morris the Wednesday before he died, added, “We were all taking instructions from Jim Morris right up until the end.”

I asked Richardson for a “Lugar story.”

He responded, “Tell me one.”

I told him about accompanying Lugar and Nunn to watch the destruction of a Soviet-era SS-25 missile motor north of Moscow in 2007. Lugar had found an aerial photo of Indianapolis, the intended target, tacked to a wall in the crew quarters of an intercontinental ballistic missile silo. After Lugar, Nunn and then-Ambassador Bill Burns (now the CIA director) pushed buttons along with their Russian military counterparts, a rumble could be felt from over a mile away.

When we went to the burn stand to inspect what Nunn likened to “converting swords to plowshares,” a light rain was falling, and then came a rainbow. 

“Sen. Lugar, look,” I beckoned. Lugar glanced skyward as a serene smile crossed his face — though, uncharacteristically, he remained silent.

Richardson had a story of his own. 

“In 2005, when Lugar introduced John Roberts to the Congress,” he said of the future Supreme Court chief justice who grew up in Long Beach, “Lugar said, ‘Growing up in Indiana, one learns early on that talent and accomplishments count, but honesty and integrity count more.’”

Brian A. Howey is senior writer and columnist for Howey Politics Indiana/State Affairs. Find Howey on Facebook and X @hwypol.

Opinion: Indiana Democrats and Chicago White Sox compete for rock bottom

CHICAGO — After spending a week in the Loop covering the Democratic National Convention, I’m not sure which one is a more pathetic entity: the Chicago White Sox or the Indiana Democratic Party.

The Chisox last week became the quickest Major League Baseball team to notch its 100th loss, on the way to surpassing the expansion 1962 New York Mets as the worst team ever. 

Since 2014, Indiana Democrats are 0-13 in statewide races. Other than candidates for governor or U.S. Senate, the party’s statewide candidates polled between 36% and 40% during this abject losing streak. Hoosier Democrats have watched the Indiana GOP extend its General Assembly supermajority status to a record five consecutive cycles, with a sixth on the way in November. Democrats control only two of 11 congressional offices and only 10% of county courthouse offices.

I used to say it was Indiana Libertarians who “play political party,” raising little money, its candidates for governor or senator offering a little debate levity on their way to 3.5% of the vote. That 2020 nominee Donald Rainwater was able to extend that number into double digits was just another pathetic milepost of futility for these political donkeys.

Indiana Democrats are knocking on this door of ineptitude. A major political party is supposed to win elections. These folks simply aren’t.

When they gathered at the Fairmont Chicago during the DNC, two positive trend lines were presenting themselves. The first was the Biden-to-Harris presidential race reset. The ascension of Vice President Kamala Harris has been a best-case-scenario, too-good-to-be-true opportunity. It is verging on a movement of fired-up female voters that could, if properly exploited, lift all ships, possibly even Jennifer McCormick’s threadbare gubernatorial campaign.

The second is that movement’s preset occurring two years ago when the U.S. Supreme Court rendered Roe vs. Wade to the historic dustbin, sending the abortion issue back to the states. Hoosier Republicans quickly obliged, enacting some of the most draconian restrictions in the nation.

Using the Dobbs decision and Gov. Eric Holcomb’s signing of SEA 1(ss) to inspire suburban female voters from Elkhart, Hamilton and Clark counties to vote Democratic became the mission. Referendums establishing reproductive rights in red states such as Kansas, Kentucky and Ohio revealed that such a comeback is possible.

This comes as the Republican presidential nominee, Donald J. Trump, was branded a “sexual predator” by a New York jury and judge in the defamation case of E. Jean Carroll (a former Indiana University cheerleader).

But the state’s most conspicuous Democratic officeholder — Indianapolis Mayor Joe Hogsett — has been exposed for letting his horndog Chief of Staff Thomas Cook use city and campaign staff to satisfy his sexual proclivities. Cook resigned, but years after the first allegations surfaced, with the mayor paying little heed.

On the eve of the DNC, rising star state Sen. Andrea Hunley called out Mayor Hogsett in an Instagram post: “Somehow, the city of Indianapolis, one of the largest employers in the county with over 7,500 staff members across 30 divisions, doesn’t have a comprehensive sexual harassment prevention policy or reporting mechanisms. [And] neither does the Indiana Democratic Party, the organization that trains Democratic volunteers, candidates, county party members and elected officials.”

Hunley wasn’t the only one to call the party out. The Indiana Latino Democratic Caucus released an angry retort: “Despite knowledge of Cook’s predatory behavior, Mayor Hogsett and his administration continued to work with Cook for six years, protecting him and keeping him as a close advisor. During this time, additional abuses occurred. Additionally, the lack of meaningful intervention from any party leaders reveals a breakdown in trust and failure in leadership.” 

Hunley said on Instagram, “I learned my lesson. I reminded myself that I was given a voice and platform for a reason. It wasn’t to wait for somebody else to speak on my behalf, so I’m speaking up now. I’m not going to stop until accountability is taken, an independent process for reporting is established, and a formal, third-party led audit has been conducted.”

Last Friday, the Hogsett administration announced the mayor intends to sign an executive order “in the coming days” to require employee sexual harassment prevention training.

But Hunley’s criticism was blunted when she and fellow Senate Democrats didn’t call out state Sen. David Niezgodski for allegedly sending dozens of unwanted texts to a woman who tried to end a business relationship. Niezgodski called it a “private personnel matter.”

Then there’s the gubernatorial campaign of Jennifer McCormick.

Indiana Democratic Chairman Mike Schmuhl told Howey Politics Indiana/State Affairs that Republican nominee Mike Braun is “vulnerable” if McCormick can catch onto any wave Kamala Harris might generate. 

“Mike Braun is a sitting U.S. senator who is not doing very well in the polls,” Schmuhl said. Asked what internal polling was showing, Schmuhl replied, “I can’t get into specifics, but for a sitting United States senator in Indiana in a presidential year, he’s not in terrific shape.”

Time out!

During this era of futility, Indiana Democrats have demonstrated a penchant for publicizing internal polling, setting up a façade of hope. But not this time.

McCormick is a historical anomaly, the first major-party nominee to switch parties. But as her midyear campaign report revealed, she is not being supported by the biggest Democratic benefactor: the unions.

In her June report, McCormick posted $250,000 from the Indiana Political Action Committee for Education (which has since put in another $208,000), but that’s the crux of her campaign that had a mere $700,000 cash on hand on June 30 — a ridiculously puny amount for a major-party nominee for governor.

The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Voluntary PAC and the United Food & Commercial Workers PAC have each given $10,000, the Anderson Federation of Teachers PAC anted up $4,000 and the United Mine Workers gave $2,500.

To put that into perspective, the 2016 campaign of Democratic nominee John Gregg had received $228,000 from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; $100,000 from the Indiana Political Action Committee for Education; $500,000 from American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; and $130,000 from the Service Employees International Union Healthcare PAC. In March 2016, The Associated Press reported that Gregg had received $2.5 million from unions. 

Or as Maureen Hayden described in her 2016 column in the Terre Haute Tribune-Star, union volunteers made 65,000 calls in the waning weeks of the campaign encouraging fellow members to vote for Gregg. Labor phone banks had made 260,000 calls as part of a monthslong campaign that also involved social media outreach and knocking on doors to push for Gregg’s election while “stressing labor’s role in determining the state’s future.”

When I asked Schmuhl whether more union money was headed for McCormick, he responded, “I think so.”

And this financial edge is extending down the ballot. According to the latest legislative caucus campaign reports covering the period through April 12, the House Republican Campaign Committee had $2,762,173 cash on hand (spent $4,919,399 during 2022 cycle) while the Indiana House Democratic Caucus had $493,529 cash on hand (spent $1,748,980 during 2022 cycle). The Senate Majority Campaign Committee had $1,769,911 cash on hand (spent $2,443,296 during the 2022 cycle), while the Indiana Senate Democrats Committee had $228,656 cash on hand (spent $666,333 during the 2022 cycle).

My final mission with Indiana Democrats last week was to catch up with U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, the former South Bend mayor and 2020 presidential candidate. He’s the biggest Hoosier star the party has produced in a decade, except he moved from Indiana to Michigan.

Catching wind that “Mayor Pete” would address the delegation on Wednesday, I asked Schmuhl and the party communications director if I could attend or get a minute or two with Pete. No response. No access. What Pete said was … a secret. No sense in alarming MAGA deep in the Hoosier hinterlands.

Buttigieg has been the Democrats secret red state weapon, spending time on Fox News urging Republican viewers to use the Google machine to get the real lowdown. Because my weekly column runs in about 20 small-town newspapers like the Decatur Daily Democrat, The Bluffton News-Banner and the legendary Crothersville Times, I figured to afford Hoosier Democrats a chance to make a pitch to folks in North Judson, Walkerton and Seymour.

Mark Leibovich, writing for The Atlantic, observed: “Officially, Buttigieg is the United States secretary of transportation. But his far more prominent role of late has been as a sound-bite and surrogate sensation for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz (and at the expense of Donald Trump and J.D. Vance). According to his staff, Buttigieg plowed through more than 30 TV, radio, and TikTok appearances over the course of 96 hours in Chicago, along with 30 speeches to constituent groups (veterans, mayors, students), 12 sets of remarks to delegation breakfasts, dozens of scheduled and unscheduled drop-bys and meet and greets with various dignitaries and appendages, and one prime-time address on Wednesday night. The next day, in the final hours of the convention, I was granted brief access to the inner swirl of this particular dust cloud.”

Leibovich reported that he spent 21 minutes in the “Buttigieg bubble”:

“I’m following you out,” I informed him as he headed to the door.

“Get some color?” Buttigieg replied, media-savvy as ever.

Yes, I would be seeking some “color,” I confirmed. “Do something colorful,” I commanded.

“I’ll be colorful,” he assured me. “Are you coming in the bubble?”

This columnist showed up a half-hour early hoping to catch the Pete spectacle, only to watch the “Buttigieg bubble” with the secretary, husband Chasten and his federal security detail hurriedly walk past me by an exterior stairwell.

When it comes to “color” and Hoosier Democrats in this one-party dominant era of Hoosier politics, the hues aren’t green or gold.

They are red … scarlet, ruby, cerise, cardinal, cherry, carmine …

Brian A. Howey is senior writer and columnist for Howey Politics Indiana/State Affairs. Find Howey on Facebook and X @hwypol.

Opinion: Pete Buttigieg’s bright future

SOUTH BEND, Ind. — Here in the city where Pete Buttigieg grew up, became Mayor Pete and launched an impressive 2020 presidential campaign, an oft-heard forecast is: “He’s going to be president someday.” 

Not this Election Day.

But he’s only 42 years old. He’s one of the bright prospects for a future Democratic presidential nomination. And his credentials have expanded from Mayor Pete to include serving as secretary of transportation and being a finalist for the party’s vice presidential nomination.

With Kamala Harris or Donald Trump as president, what will Buttigieg do after this presidential election?

Possibilities vary greatly, depending on the next occupant of the White House.

If Harris wins, she no doubt would welcome Buttigieg to remain in the cabinet. They are like-minded on the direction of the country, appealing to the middle class and Middle West at home and in confronting Putin abroad. Her regard for Buttigieg is clear — he’s the only cabinet member who was a finalist for running mate and given a prime-time speaking slot at the Democratic National Convention.

Secretary of transportation? 

The way he handled crisis after crisis on transportation issues — first attacked by Trumpsters and then prevailing with solutions — would make him a sound choice to continue in that role.

And he might want to continue in transportation, with opportunities to cut ribbons all across the nation on needed and popular infrastructure projects now underway.

Or maybe Buttigieg could move to a cabinet post regarded as more prestigious — secretary of defense or secretary of state, providing credentials in world affairs.

Or maybe something else in the administration. Or something for a time away from government and politics.

If Trump wins, Buttigieg of course would get no cabinet post.

It’s hard to picture two people more unlike in so many ways than Donald Trump and Pete Buttigieg. 

So, what would Buttigieg do?

Well, we don’t need to be concerned about Pete and Chasten Buttigieg being unable to adequately support their 3-year-old twins. Pete and Chasten are successful authors and will command big advance payments for future books. They will have no shortage of employment opportunities.

Mayor Pete won’t need to come back to run for his former office.

He could become a corporate executive, making far more than the salary of a cabinet secretary or president of the United States. Again, however, there is that difference with Trump. Making big money has never been an overwhelming goal for Buttigieg.

With his academic credentials — Harvard, Oxford, Rhodes Scholar and, yes, graduate of South Bend’s St. Joseph High School — he could become a university president.

He could become a TV personality. He already is, though not with his own show or any pay for appearing. In news interviews, Buttigieg is one of the most successful communicators of Democratic views, even appearing frequently to counter hostile questioning on Fox News. He began his convention speech with: “Here is a sentence I never thought I would hear myself saying: ‘I’m Pete Buttigieg, and you might recognize me from Fox News.’”

He could run for elective office. Certainly not for the House. Almost certainly not for the Senate. A race for governor in Indiana, Michigan or elsewhere also seems unlikely in his future. Chances are the only office he will run for is president. No additional stepping stone is needed.

In the immediate future, whether there’s a President Harris or again a President Trump, Buttigieg will have many opportunities. Will they lead to the White House?

It’s as impossible now to calculate chances on any candidate for 2028 or 2032 as it is to quote odds on Notre Dame winning the national football championship in ’28 or ’32. But it’s pretty safe to forecast that neither Pete nor the Fighting Irish will be relegated to obscurity by then.

Jack Colwell has covered Indiana politics for over five decades for the South Bend Tribune. Email him at [email protected].

Opinion: Israel transcends American politics

EVANSVILLE, Ind. — A peculiar irony is at play in American politics. We are more divided than ever on nearly every issue that crosses our screens, but amid the cacophony, one cause transcends the usual partisan sniping: Israel. At the Democratic and Republican conventions, the support for the Jewish state rang loud and clear, like a national anthem we’ve somehow remembered in an age of relentless discord.

In Chicago last week, the Democratic National Convention was marked by a poignant moment when Jon Polin and Rachel Goldberg, parents of Israeli-American hostage Hersch Goldberg Polin, took the stage. Their plea was simple and powerful: “Bring them home.” 

The crowd, composed of delegates who often can’t agree on whether the sky is blue, stood united in applause, chanting in unison. Outside, anti-Israel protests boiled over, a reminder that even within the tent of progressivism, fissures exist. But inside, the resolve was undeniable. The Democratic platform, despite the vocal protests from its far-left fringe, reaffirmed the Biden administration’s unyielding support for Israel.

That might seem surprising given the leftward drift of some segments of the Democratic Party, where voices have grown louder against Israeli policy. Yet, when the moment came, the overwhelming majority of Democrats stood firm, rebuffing any suggestion that the party’s commitment to Israel is wavering. It’s a testament to something deeper in the American psyche, something that goes beyond politics and touches on a shared moral narrative.

Across the aisle, at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee in July, the scene was almost a mirror image. Orna and Ronen Neutra, whose American son remains in the clutches of Hamas, stood before the crowd. Their pain and desperation were palpable, their message simple: “Bring them home.” 

Again, the crowd erupted in solidarity, the same chant echoing from a different political spectrum. Fraternity brothers from the University of North Carolina were celebrated onstage for defending the American flag from pro-Palestinian protesters. In an era when patriotism itself has become a partisan battleground, this moment of unity was striking.

Yet, it’s important to note the GOP has tried, again and again, to turn Israel into a wedge issue. The rhetoric is often sharper, the accusations more pointed, aimed at painting Democrats as weak or inconsistent in their support for Israel. But so far, this tactic has failed to drive a significant divide. The reason? Americans’ support for Israel runs deep, transcending the superficial battles of the day.

What is it about Israel that unites such disparate factions in our fractured body politic? The answer lies in the complex intersection of history, culture and shared values. For many Americans, Israel represents more than just a strategic ally in a volatile region. It is seen as a beacon of democracy in the Middle East, a symbol of resilience in the face of existential threats. Also, a deep well of religious and cultural affinity runs through both the evangelical right and the liberal Jewish left.

But perhaps more than anything, Israel serves as a litmus test for something uniquely American: the commitment to a moral cause, however imperfectly understood or unevenly applied. This isn’t to ignore or minimize the serious and valid criticisms of Israeli policy, particularly from those on the left who advocate for Palestinian rights. But in the grand narrative that Americans have constructed, Israel is a symbol of a nation’s right to exist, to defend itself and to flourish in the face of profound adversity.

In this light, the support for Israel at both conventions isn’t just political posturing; it’s a reflection of a shared moral compass, a rare moment of clarity in a landscape otherwise dominated by noise. It’s a reminder that, even in an age of profound division, some things still bind us together. And in those moments, we see a glimpse of what America might still be: a nation capable of unity in pursuit of justice.

Joshua Claybourn is an author and attorney in Evansville, Indiana. Visit him at JoshuaClaybourn.com.

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