♪ ♪ >> Allegations against Diego Morales.

>>> A new Senate poll shows a tightening race.

>>> Plus, calls for leadership changes at Purdue and more on Indiana Week in Review for the week ending October 7, 2022.

♪ ♪ >> "Indiana Week In Review" is made possible by the supporters of Indiana public broadcasting stations.

>>> This week, two anonymous women leveled sexual assault allegations against Republican Secretary of State candidate Diego Morales.

The allegations, which date back more than a decade, were unveiled in interview transcripts released by Indy Politics' Abdul-Hakim Shabazz's Cheat Sheet newsletter.

>>> The first woman says she first met Morales while working on a Republican congressional campaign.

She accuses him of forcefully kissing her, rubbing against her and groping her, despite her repeated refusal of his advances.

The second woman says she worked with Morales in the Secretary of State's office.

She claims he repeatedly tried to kiss her before she pushed him away.

Morales flatly denies the allegations.

He says the women have no proof and that their claims are politically motivated.

Both women say they're volunteering for Democratic Secretary of State candidate Destiny Wells.

In a recent IndyStar report, Indiana Republican Party Chair Kyle Hupfer acknowledged that the first woman came to him months ago with her story.

>> Will these allegations make a difference in the election?

It's the first question for our Indiana Week in Review panel Democrat Ann DeLaney ... Republican Mike O'Brien Kaitlin Lange, Statehouse reporter for the Indianapolis Star and Lindsey Erdody, associate editor for Axios Local I'm Indiana Public Broadcasting Statehouse Bureau Chief Brandon Smith Mike O'Brien, quite frankly, are voters going to care about these allegations?

>> Mike O'Brien: Some will, but history recently, or at least in 2016, since Donald Trump came on the scene, we have had this situations before and it's either not mattered.

Depending on where you are, of course, but in Indiana think back to when mike pence stun suspended his campaign, Donald Trump tapes come out, everyone thinks this is cooked.

And the opposite happens, the base comes in and rallies around and that's what's 9happening in Georgia and Hirschal Walker and the allegations -- not to understate, and the allegations against Diego, and Hirschal Walker even with kids around him, it's a tribal, combination of all these things,ism.

Politics is a sports culture, I'm a bears fan, there is nothing the Green Bay Packers will do that I find redeemable even though that's the best idea they've had ever had, that's the lens I put into politics, that's my guy, I don't care what you say about him.

And on what he or may not have done in the past, he's my guy, it's not a low ballot race, it's a statewide administrative office that's not well-funded, not well-organized.

There's not going to be millions of dollars of ads coming behind this so it's hard for voters to even find it and if they do, history tells us they kind of stay in their corner.

>> We had slightly similar allegations, against Attorney General Curtis Hill in recent history in Indiana, and Curtis Hill was rejected by Republicans in convention and, again, in a precinct caucus for Jackie well Wilorski's seat, will the allegations change minds in the race?

>> Ann DeLaney: You're right, the tribalism in there and you see that particularly in Georgia, when you see the terrible allegations of hypocrisy against Hirschal walker and I ethe gets a standing ovation, when he walks into a church who is supposedly anti-abortion, he's dying a death by a thousand nicks the Republicans will stay with him absolutely but there's a group in the middle that do go both ways and between the fact he's now involved in the #metoo allegations, by Republican women before he was a candidate and reported, right contemporaneous with the occurrence, and he's failed at being a event because his misrepresented his credentials in the regard and failed in the office he's elected to, been fired effectively twice from that office, wants to restrict voting doesn't like early voting he still denied the election of Joe Biden in 2022; I mean, he is a disaster candidate for the Republicans andit's a thousand little nicks, and I think it will make a difference, not among the hard-core right wing nominated him over holly Sullivan, but it will make a difference with independent voters.

>> We saw a poll out of Abdul Hakim Shabazz's Indie politics along with we're going to do a next poll on the next topic, I believe Destiny Wells had a slight lead and there's a lot of people ubdecideed and Diego isn't picking up a lot of Republicans in that poll, so when you combine all of these things, is Diego in trouble?

>> I would like to say that he is in trouble but I am not sure I can go as far as saying he is in trouble to Mike's point earlier about we've seen this happen before, I think Ann has a point these are not the only allegations against him, there are other things in play in this race going against him that could turn some voters away, but what I think would have been interesting to see, to your point about Curtis Hill, is had these come out preconvention, would that have made a difference in terms of who Republicans would have nominated?

And, given the history with Curtis Hill it makes me think maybe yes, they would have nominated someone else, if, again, all of these different things coming out against him, his veteran status the allegations from these women, not just the sexual assault allegations on their own, but all of these things adding up preconvention, may be what would have made a difference >> I think it would have, it was close, it wasn't a blowout, as it went through the convention process.

>> These allegations are particularly tricky because of the way they have come out.

Do you think that also hurts the cause of them making a difference, in this election?

>> I think so, I mean, obviously, Abdul published the cheat sheet which unfortunately has a disclaimer that it is, you know, gossip.

I know he did move it onto his Indie Politics Web site later, but, you know, you kind of wonder if the damage was already done in a sense.

And I think the -- I look back at last time a Democrat won, a statewide election, 2012, you know, Richard Murdoch's situation, you know, one of the reasons he lost, I think, is because so many outlets had picked up on his comments, you had national outlets picking up on it, and in this situation you don't have that.

So it's to the point of, yeah, is everyone actually going to know about these allegations enough to make the decision?

That's best for them?

>> I wonder if it's almost, there's been so many allegations against so many candidates we're sitting here talking about Georgia.

>> Everywhere.

>> Across up and down the ballot with offices it's almost like people become numb to the allegations.

>> And they're used tactically, too, so, you know, the questions are on this situation are -- why didn't we find out before the convention?

Why are we finding out 30-days and now you're working on the campaign, and all that -- >> I don't think -- >> The stories stand on their own, and I get it, but, I'm not agreeing with him.

I'm saying that's why voters tend to go wait a minute.

>> Exempt these are allegations by Republican women who probably didn't expect him to get the nomination in the first place.

ô> The one woman, even said, she kind of almost regretted not coming out before the convention, because maybe it would have had a bigger impact.

>> I don't know, I think maybe the allegations might have had that impact but some of the other stuff, I'm not sure, even before the convention, we already knew about him being fired from the Secretary of State's office.

>> I mean, candidates -- >> Veteran stuff, they knew that before the convention.

>> That's fair, but I just don't know how much of an impact it would have made because of that.

>>> Time now for viewer feedback.

Each week we pose an unscientific, online poll question.

This week's question: Who will win Indiana's Secretary of State race?

A. Republican Diego Morales B. Democrat Destiny Wells C. Libertarian Jeff Maurer Last week's question: Should Indiana expand access to contraception and comprehensive sex education?

5% said yes just just to contraception, 3% said yes just to sex ed, 90% said Indiana should do both just 2% say they shouldn't do either.

If you would like to take part in the poll go to WFYI.org/IWIR and look for the poll.

>>> Well, I just mentioned it a new poll from Abdul Hakim Shabazz's Indie politics and the polling firm ARW strategies shows a tightening race between incumbent Republican U-S Senator Todd Young and Democrat Tom McDermott.

>>> The poll has Young at 39 percent, McDermott at 37 and Libertarian Senate candidate James Sceniak at six percent while 17 percent of voters are still undecided.

Yet on money, the numbers aren't close.

From January of last year through June of this year, Young brought in nearly 14 times more money than McDermott.

Mike Schmuhl is chair of the Indiana Democratic Party.

He says when it comes to funding, candidates are largely responsible for raising their own money.

But he says the state party is having conversations with national Democrats about bringing more funding to McDermott's race.

(MIKE SCHMUHL: THOSE CONVERSATIONS JUST TO BE COMPLETELY BLUNT ARE ONGOING.

I HOPE TO HAVE MORE OF THEM IN THE DAYS AND WEEKS AHEAD) >>>.

>> Schmuhl says in 2022, Democratic races in the Hoosier state are receiving more funding relative to 2020 - which he says was weighted heavily towards Republicans.

But Schmuhl says it will take time to build up consistent funding for Democrats in Indiana.

>>> Ann DeLaney, is the lack of national money in the Senate race the best indicator that, despite that poll, it's still likely not all that close?

>> Ann DeLaney: Well, I mean, it's certainly the lack of national money is not a good thing, but I think the striking thing about this poll is you've had Todd young in the house, and Todd Young as the Senator for six years, and basically not aa lot of people know him, and this time, in this election, I think, unlike most other elections in Indiana, the Republican label is not an asset for him.

I mean, between January 6th, all Republicans would rather not talk about -- and all the lies about who won the 2020 Election, and, the restriction of reproductive rights that are identified with the Republican party, even to the point of saying, that if they get a majority, they want to look at whether contraception should be readily available.

Those issues, I think, hurt Republican candidates, this time around.

And he -- usually the label Republican is a -- is a tremendous asset running statewide in Indiana, I don't think that's the case now.

>> For Todd Young specifically and who he has built himself up as a Senator, as a candidate, similarly, to the -- Secretary of State poll that I mentioned earlier, there's a -- he's not getting every Republican in that poll, he would you would expect he could get the vast vast vast majority of Republicans, particularly, because he's Todd Young, is that what's going to make the difference -- if these numbers are accurate, is that what makes the difference between now and election day?

>> Well, he -- I think he would get the vast majority of I think the people in the middle, the independents, not one of these dumpster fire Senate candidates we can see all over the country and you can bet because we're slipping in other places if NRSC, thought Todd young was at risk, they would pour a lot of money to make sure they keep him in because of especially the type of Senator he is, he is not a fire brand an election denier, he doesn't live on the fringe, he's a thoughtful guy in the middle.

>> Chair of the Senate campaign.

>> Campaign committee.

Not -- never an automatic Trump guy, he thought about everything, mostly with Trump, of course, but he is a thoughtful.

>> Mostly.

>> Thoughtful guy, right?

>> Overwhelmingly.

>>> He's a thoughtful guy, I can't do the math how much money he spent on McDermott in that environment you either within if you're the Democrat and no one knows you if there's a wave which there's not for either party or it's a protest vote, because the negatives are so high on the incumbent that you're going to throw a protest vote in, whoever -- I don't know who tom McDermott is because I'm voting for him was he's not this guy, that's.

>> Ann talked about that may not be the automatic boost for some candidate DZ in Indiana, even if that's the case because of who Todd Young is specifically, is that going to help him more than anything else?

>> I think he's probably fairly safe.

I think it is interesting this poll was similar to the poll McDermott campaign put out in terms of numbers but, I mean, you have to keep in mind that all of the political ratings agencies like, politico report all those aren't labeling it as competitive in any of the money thing as well.

I think the sort of wildcard I would be interested in is if we see, some movement from the courts on the abortion -- the near total abortion ban, if we see something happen with that, what impact that has?

And stirring the pot, making people more angry.

>> Close to election day.

>> Right.

>> Money isn't everything, it matters a lot, Todd Young has may way more of it than McDermott.

More than that we're talking about the fact it doesn't feel like this race is really all that close despite the polls.

Does that perception matter as much as anything else to who is going to win on election day?

If voters think Todd young has this, does he got this?

>> We're talking about the average voter, not about political types, the average going to the grocery store, actually -- Todd Young's got a lock on this.

>> That is my -- >> I read the cross -- >> But I'm saying.

>> Exactly they're not looking at polls, they're just getting a sense of the race of what they might hear.

>> They are.

And if money isn't being spent on the race, they would hear less about the race.

>> Todd Young isn't the only one -- >> You're not hearing things on TV on the radio as much, think back to our last Senate race, I mean, we were just bombarded with ads, right?

Because it was a close race, you're not really seeing that right now.

To the point of, like, name recognition, I think, that's what McDermott really would need to work on, and I think, we'll see, if he goes up on TV soon, I'm thinking he probably will.

That will help on in terms of name recognition, because, love or hate Todd Young you probably know the name.

And that goes a long way for people in the voting booth, whether we sit here and agree with that's why people should make their decisions on voting for candidates or not.

It -- it does have an impact.

>> >>> MeToo Purdue held a rally recently, calling for the resignation of campus leaders found guilty of retaliating against students who came forward with sexual assault allegations.

>> A jury recently found Purdue University guilty of retaliation and treating a student differently because she was a woman.

That included Purdue's Dean of Students and the Vice President for Ethics and Compliance.

Charlotte Russell is president of MeToo Purdue.

She said in a meeting with Purdue's Dean of Students, she was told the way to reduce sexual violence on campus was to increase the number of people who came forward to report.

CHARLOTTE RUSSELL: THAT VERY ADMINISTRATION THAT TOLD US THE SOLUTION TO SOLVING THIS ISSUE WAS TO GET SURVIVORS TO REPORT IS NOW PUNISHING SURVIVORS THAT DO REPORT, CLAIMING THAT THEY ARE LYING.

DO YOU THINK ANYONE WOULD FEEL SAFE TO REPORT KNOWING THAT?

THE HYPOCRISY IS OUTSTANDING.

>> MeToo Purdue is calling for the Dean of Students and Vice President for Ethics and Compliance to resign.

The group also wants to see revisions to the school's false statement policy - making it easier for students to come forward.

A spokesperson for Purdue University said in a written statement that while they support students' passion, "“we believe, because of the evidence presented, that this is not the correct case to use in advocating for it.

"” >> Lindsey Erdody, Purdue is already in the midst of a leadership change at the top of the university.

How carefully does it need to handle this situation?

Lindsey Erdody: I mean, obviously, it's a very sensitive subject that people care a lot about.

And we're going to keep hearing about it, whether it's the specific case, or other cases, of sexual allegations that come up.

I don't -- the Purdue statement that went out about the calls for resignations, very clearly said, that's not happening.

We're not firing these people, we don't expect them to resign.

Now, that being said you mentioned the leadership-changes coming up.

I -- I think all of that holds true, as long as Mitch Daniels is there, but a new president coming in tends to bring about other leadership changes, so, if there was going to be a time, when those positions, you know, had turnover, it would probably be then when the new president takes office in January, but, again, I don't think that's any guarantee.

>>> This isn't a case of he said, she said, allegations, that we can't -- they lost.

In court.

Why hold the -- if you're Purdue, why are you holding this line of nope, everything's fine, they're wrong, we still believe in our process.

Why all the lying on that, when you've already lost?

>>, I mean, the alternative is, you know, letting those folks go, I just don't know that they want to -- want to do that.

I think also, the other thing to keep in mind is this is pretty much in line with the general attitude of, you know, the previous administration's education policy.

In terms of, you know, they made a move to give more rights sort of to those being accused, to prevent those allegations so I think, Purdue is still in that mindset there.

It hasn't changed that >> This matters for a lot of reasons, but one of them is, Purdue's been doing great when it comes to attracting students to its university.

That gets harder if there's a sense, it's similar to what we talked about the election, people don't figure out every detail when they try to figure out where to go to college and questions raise, what is going on in Lafayette for Purdue to go, we've got to take a look at everything here >> I have a hard time calling a shot on this and I don't know, what I don't know, the conversations they're having -- having internally, I mean, the thought is, this isn't systemic, and it's -- and you can address it with these -- with these individuals and then create a systemic -- create a positive out of it to make sure the culture is not -- what they lost in court on.

I mean, I'm sorry, I have a hard time calling a shot on that.

It certainly doesn't look good if you're researching a college, but I don't know if it's a ultimately a deciding factor unless it was discovered it was some kind of, like, broad systemic, like, intentional.

>> It would be -- >> Process.

>> It would be a bigger problem, if you had a person in authority doing it to a student.

>> Or directing it.

>> But I think part of the problem here is that Title IX was designed to address, what was perceived as a problem for women in higher education, of sexual harassment.

And it was real.

And, it was there, and it needed to be addressed.

I have a little problem with it, though, when it comes to an allegation of rape.

I don't think that the universities ought to be handling this at all.

I think it should be, then, referred to the Prosecutor, -- and the state prosecutor on this, we're talking about a criminal charge here, we're talking about a Felony; and the idea that a school can handle that by itself, when the remedy is limited to expulsion -- is ridiculous.

If that -- if that was a rape, he ought to be in prison.

He shouldn't be picking another school to go to.

So, I think we ought to look at what Title IX was designed to do, and it needs to provide protection for young women, going to college, for the first time, from sexual harassment, particularly, from people in authority.

But, if it's a criminal charge, like rape, among two contemporaries or even among a professor.

>> It shouldn't be going to a Title IX office.

>> It should be going to a prosecutor, who is trained to evaluate those cases.

>>> Last year an Indiana law took away protections for "“isolated wetlands"” wetlands that aren't directly connected to a body of water and make up most of the wetlands in the state.

Indiana Public Broadcasting's Rebecca Thiele tells us, now a task force created to study wetland protections in Indiana has released its final report.

Reporter: Among other things, the task force says the state should give more funding to environmental agencies, provide tax incentives for developers who avoid building on wetlands, and protect isolated wetlands under state law instead of relying on federal protections alone.

Task force chair Will Ditzler says, at some point, Indiana will have to start making the environment a priority.

Right now, we're laging behind neighboring states.

WILL DITZLER: SO IT JUST REALLY COMES DOWN TO PRIORITIZATION.

DO WE WANT TO LIVE IN A STATE THAT HAS GOOD WATER QUALITY AND HAS WETLANDS FOR WILDLIFE AND HAS LESS FLOODING OR NOT?

>> The report also recommends allowing home builders to increase housng density which would mean more homes on smaller lots of land.

It's cheaper for developers and requires fewer roads and other hard surfaces that create runoff into wetland areas.

>> Kitlin Lange, how likely is it that Indiana lawmakers would reverse their decision of just a couple sessions ago on wetlands protections?

>> I think it's very unlikely, the make-up of the general assembly, really hasn't changed.

Probably won't change all that much in November.

So I don't think they're going to come in and just say "oops we made a mistake on the wetlands, let's go back to what we were doing before."

But I do think that they will be willing to look at housing density, things like incentives for developers, not to build on wetlands, like I think those are easier sells.

In a general assembly that has a pretty strong, you know, builders' voice.

There's lots of lawmakers with those connections and that is something they would all want.

It's also, I think, you know, tax breaks are kind of an easier sell, than maybe, diverting more money towards something.

When you're looking at a budget year when lots of people are going to have requests.

>> Yeah, we just talked about the housing task force on this show, last week, or a couple of weeks ago, with looking at, we have a serious housing shortage in this state, like many states do.

That, combined with this, could we see some changes that are being recommended in these reports?

>> It certainly helps make the case a little bit stronger than, you know, just one task force on this one single issue, coming, and making recommendations, because they do kind of align, like you said, but, at the same time, I agree with Kaitlin, I mean, I just don't think it's superlikely they come in and change their mind.

I mean, the vote on this bill was closer than most votes but not close enough that you really think, enough lawmakers are going to change their mind on it.

There are a lot of home-builders or people connected to that industry.

In the general assembly.

That wanted this bill.

You know, I also was looking at, the -- one of the requests was for more funding for, you know, -- wetland protections or environmental concerns, and, you know, it is a budget year.

But there's a ton of requests coming in, and it's kind of, like, well, where does that fall on the list of priorities?

And I don't think it's going to be superhigh.

>> Yeah, traditionally, it doesn't.

They did this feels like backwards which is they took away the protections and said let's create this task force to study it.

>> To study it.

>> Was this always going to be the result?

Yes, taking away all protections for wetlands is bad but what are we going to do?

>> There are lots of things you can do, for example there are not for profits around the country that will create a wetland to make up for the one that you have to have where you need to build on it.

There are options available there, and we may see enough of a change in the general assembly, with the close vote on that.

But things may change.

We'll see.

>> I'm not betting on that.

>> You're always negative anyway.

>> That's true, but, I mean, will we see any changes come out of this report?

Or because -- >> There was also an element, it wasn't just about wetland, there is an underlying element of agency overreach and the bill was a reaction to that and there are other examples to the point, where the representative has administrative agency kind of oversight, interim committee that's looking at other areas, and it's because there is a perception in the legislature, right now that the agencies are overreaching in this and other areas and that's why this bill isn't as expansive as it was, so we'll see how all of it plays out over the next session.

I want to remind, August -- this coming week, the deadline to register to vote or to change and update your registration, is coming up.

It's this coming Tuesday, October 11th; if you want to go and do that in person, at your local Election administrator office, you have until the end of the business day if you go to Indianavoters.com, you can register, change your registration, update your registration, apply for an absentee mail-in ballot check on your polling placeering who is on your ballot.

All that fun stuff, please do that.

Check your registration, even if you think you know you're already registered just to make sure all of your info is up to date, because voting matters, friends, that's "Indiana Week In Review" for this week.

Our panel is Democrat Ann DeLaney, Republican Mike O'Brien Kaitlin Lange of the IndyStar and Lindsey Erdody of Axios Local You can find Indiana Week In Review's podcast and episodes at wfyi.org/iwir or on the PBS Video App.

I'm Brandon Smith of Indiana Public Broadcasting.

Join us next time because a lot can happen in an Indiana Week.