Craig Haggard runs for Congress.

Third grade reading scores jump.

Plus plagiarism allegations against IUs president and more.

From the television studios at WFYI.

It's Indiana Week in Review for the week ending August 15th, 2025.

Indiana Week in Review is produced by WFYI in association with Indiana Public Broadcasting Stations.

This week, Republican Craig Haggard announced he won't seek a third term in the Indiana House of Representatives next year, instead running for the U.S. House, a seat currently held by Republican Jim Baird.

Haggard explored a run for Indiana's fourth congressional district in 2024, but opted against it after Baird ran for reelection.

Haggard's announcement this week comes on the heels of explosive allegations in the lieutenant governor's office that have ties to Haggard's wife.

The Marion County prosecutor is investigating a claim of a fake topless video of Haggard's wife performing during a charity event earlier this year.

Tom Bianco, of 24 Site News reported recently that two of Lieutenant Governor Michael Beckwith staffers viewed the video in the office.

Beckwith has flatly denied the allegations, and the existence of the video itself hasn't been confirmed.

Will the alleged video have implications for Haggard's congressional run?

It's the first question for our Indiana Week in Review panel.

Democrat Lindsay Haake.

Republican Whitley Yates.

Jon Schwantes, host of Indiana Lawmakers.

And Niki Kelly, editor in chief of the Indiana Capital Chronicle.

I'm Indiana Public Broadcasting Statehouse Bureau Chief Brandon Smith.

Lindsay.

First of all, whether the video is real or not, this is awful for for Craig Haggard's wife.

Just awful.

But the idea that it might exist.

It's just awful.

But there is a political reality here, too.

And so, in the political context, will this video be an issue during the campaign?

It depends.

If I were Representative Haggard, I certainly wouldn't want it to be.

this is when you are running for public office.

You're an elected.

Obviously, you put yourself out there in ways that no one expects you would have to.

It's a 24 seven.

Thankless job.

You get asked questions and the weather, your mind, your business and the grocery store or whatever.

You know, this constituent services is happening all the time.

And so you're out in the, in the public.

But that is absolutely this.

This video is absolutely no excuse.

It does not matter if you're a public official.

It's just it's obscene.

and I really hope it doesn't become an issue in the campaign for her sake.

However, the accountable I mean, we've got to learn who did this and hold them to account because this is reprehensible and it must never occur again.

It seems very likely that Craig Haggard won't be the only one running for the seat, whether Jim Baird runs for reelection or if he doesn't.

I would expect to see multiple people step into that, into that race potentially including, Jim's son Beau, who's a state representative.

You don't, you know, it shouldn't be part of the campaign.

but will it become part of the campaign?

I think it depends on who's going to run.

I think there's no way that it doesn't, or less about even who's running and more about some of the PACs that support people.

We've watched races get very intense.

We've seen people's families maligned with lies and mailer pieces that have gone out.

And so I do think it's something to be fearful of, that it does come up and then that the family has more embarrassment, specifically the wife in shame.

However, Greg Haggard is someone that has ran toward problems like when he was in the military.

And so I do see him continuing to fight not only for his seat, but to fight for his family.

I want to talk a little bit about Michael Beckwith s office.

we don't know that this video is real.

We don't know if it is real that it was viewed by people who even.

Know if it exists.

No, don't don't don't know if the video itself is.

I mean, what's depicted in the video?

Definitely not real.

We don't know if the video exists.

If it does exist, we don't know that people in the office watched it.

Is Michael back to his sort of handling of this so far?

Working for him or for anyone?

You know, so little is known about this.

It seems to me at this point we don't know who produced it.

We don't know the motivation of the person who produced it.

We don't know the intention of the use or distribution, if you want to call it that.

You know, typically when you have unfortunately, there aren't many instances like this.

So typically is a word I use.

Well, fortunately there aren't many instances.

I mean, they're.

Not.

That's not something that happens.

Sure, sure.

But not necessarily.

And in this context.

But it's, typically it's meant to harass or intimidate the person who's being depicted.

Was there a plan to distribute this or to hold it in abeyance saying, we have this video and it purports, we're going to pass it off as real and to embarrass you in some fashion.

I don't know, we just don't know.

Yeah.

also not having seen it.

you know, there's a fine line between.

There's nothing good about this, don't get me wrong, but there's sometimes, let's take it out of the context of the lewd aspect.

There will be a lot of litigation, I think, in years to come, here and elsewhere, as states grapple with AI technology.

Because where do the jib jabs and the other sorts of things where you put a head on a dancing figure?

Again, not this context, but saying something silly and you're making fun of politicians and so forth.

You know, that's the statute, technically.

Deal with that kind of thing.

Or is this I know we're dealing different statutes.

They have not been tested in court in many cases.

In Indiana.

Not in Indiana.

And, our statute is slightly different from some of the states where it has been tested.

So I guess that's a very long winded way of saying we don't know enough to know how this will turn out and be the political ramifications.

Kind of the same question, Niki.

How do you think might come back?

I mean, that's the first.

I mean, he's certainly courted controversy before, but this is a very different level when you're talking about potential criminal charges for something.

How do you think he's handling this?

Yeah, I mean, I think he could be a little more clear.

You know, he he came out very quickly and said, oh, I looked into it and it's false, but I don't think we understand what you mean by I looked into it.

Did you just ask them, did you check their e-mail?

I mean, I don't know that he has access to personal phones and stuff like that.

So I feel like he could be a little more upfront about, you know, what he did to look into it.

but I also feel like he there is an investigation.

We know that.

And so he could also be holding some of that back because he doesn't want to interfere in that.

I think the key person in this now is Prosecutor Ryan Mears, and I think he does owe it to the public to pretty quickly say, you know, yes, we could substantiate this or no, we couldn't.

Maybe we even start there and then he can still do more.

Yeah.

On it.

But it would it would help stop a lot of, you know, circulating rumors.

I mean, and that's what, you know, governor Braun asked about this right away.

That's kind of been his line this whole time, which is transparency, transparency and transparency, whether it's in Mike, a backwards office or at the prosecutor's office.

It was also kind of the elephant in the room yesterday during the I task force meeting at the legislature.

you sitting right there in the house ways and means room.

And, you know, you're you're discussing AI and the ability of, state government to utilize it in ways to help people.

And here we are with a scandal growing in our own state House about this issue.

yeah, I think it was Matt Damon who, last year and then it was repeated this year, said AI is is wonderful and scary.

The passing rate on Indiana's third grade reading exam rebounded this year to the highest it's been since before the pandemic.

The statewide average jumped nearly five percentage points, the largest increase in the history of the test.

Indiana Secretary of Education Katie Jenner says the gains show the state's focus on elementary literacy skills is paying off.

Celebrate the moment, and tomorrow we get up and keep our foot on this gas pedal because it was stated, the toughest part is not just maintaining.

It's continuing to.

Improve.

More than 87% of Indiana third graders passed the reading test.

Indiana made several targeted moves to increase literacy.

Teachers can participate in trainings.

State colleges are required to follow evidence based practices in educator training, and a new state law tightens a requirement for schools to hold back students who have not passed the exam.

Whitley, has Indiana turned the corner on literacy.

I definitely think this is something to be applauded.

We saw that there was a lag in literacy rates for third graders.

A policy went into an effect, and I do believe that it was wrap around.

It was parents getting involved.

It was students.

It was over 170 million from the General Assembly to attack this.

So I would say kudos to the administration, to the legislatures, as well as the wonderful Doctor Jenner in addressing this.

One of the things I also noticed was that the wins and increases weren't just in charter schools.

Private schools are those schools that have an abundance of resources with IPS.

They had a 10% increase, double the state average for their literacy rates.

And I read and so that's commendable to Superintendent Johnson and all of the educators, teachers and parents, everyone working together to get our children on the right path.

So often in government policy across a range of things, it's it's, you know, the ship turns slowly, right?

You're doing all these things for a long time, and you feel like you only ever see the incremental growth, a jump like this is it how how, how important is it for the people who've been doing this work to go, okay, all that work we've been doing.

Look, it's working.

Yes, but I noticed you put in the teachers in the very last.

You included the teachers of the very last moment.

Want to make sure that everyone understands this is because of the educators.

You know, the.

Absolutely.

It takes everyone and the nonprofit sector as well that was involved in this conversation.

I mean, you had a lot of folks driving this, you know, central way or a United Way was involved, and you had a lot of components there.

And when you have that many stakeholders, it's hard to remember everyone.

But the educators, of course, are going to be the ones who need to be thanked and I love how Katie Jenner has been out in front doing that.

I think that's needed.

But there is always more to learn when you're dealing with K through 12 policy like this.

And I'm just wondering what you know, what's next coming down the the ticket.

Well, to that point, Niki, there's an 87% passage rate.

This is the first year of the new sort of like stricter law about holding kids back, about limiting the exceptions for which kids aren't held back if they fail the test.

But we don't have all of those answers yet.

Yeah, that was the one downside.

And I kind of get it.

Like, you want to celebrate your win, right?

But the fact is I don't a kids are in school already, so I don't understand why we don't know what grades they're in if they're literally starting.

But they say we can't get that data till count day in October.

But clearly, you know, they did add a few good cause exemptions.

We had about 10,000 students not pass.

So obviously a number of those are going to get good exemptions.

But previously even those who didn't there were still thousands who didn't get it, who just moved on.

And so I feel like we have half the picture.

But, you know, we're still waiting for a key part.

Yeah.

And to that end, you know, Katie Jenner in the peace talks about, you know, the really hard work now is continuing to improve.

And that work will go on.

Is the next big piece of this puzzle going to be what happens to those kids who were held back this time?

And how is how is all of this going to work for those students?

You'd like to think that's an attention grabber for parents and students, who don't have fundamental learning issues but are maybe just being a little lackadaisical about it there.

They are seeing that there are teeth and there are repercussions for failure to pass this.

So I guess that is part and parcel of, of this reform.

but you're right.

you'd like to see those people, those kids say, wow, next year we're going to work with my parents every night.

We're going to get that reading down pat.

And they they do pass next time.

That's the good story.

in the meantime, that's an unanswered question.

My theme today, unanswered questions.

But yeah, let's celebrate.

87% is great.

Let's really celebrate when they hit 100, though.

That seems unlikely.

But, but yeah, getting to getting to 90 or above will be the next, the next, the next big win.

All right.

Time now for viewer feedback.

Each week we post an unscientific online poll question.

And this week's question is do Indiana's latest I read scores show that the state's focus on literacy is making a difference a yes or b no.

Last week, we asked you whether Indiana lawmakers should redraw the state's congressional district map.

Just 7% of you say yes, 93% say no.

If you'd like to take part in the poll, go to fyi.org/eyewear and look for the poll.

Well, despite denials from Indiana University President Pamela Whitten is still facing plagiarism accusations.

And now governor Mike Braun is getting involved.

Braun says he recently became aware of the claims.

Reports of Whitten's alleged plagiarism came out in January, and experts confirmed she did appear to copy certain phrases without proper attribution.

A more serious allegation about potential plagiarism in her doctoral dissertation that previously reported came out this week.

Braun says he expects the IU board to determine if the claims are true and act quickly.

In January, IU said it has already worked with an independent law firm to review plagiarism claims against Whitten.

The university decided the claims lacked merit, though it did not name the law firm or publish its findings.

Niki, are the walls closing in on Pamela Whitten?

Yeah, I don't know.

I mean, I think she's got a lot of support from, you know, Republicans in the state for sure.

And I'm also a little confused.

I mean, I thought we already knew about this allegation.

It's been months since then.

I hadn't seen anything happen.

So I feel like we're talking about the same, same issue again.

Of course, the board should look into it, though.

I mean, that seems pretty basic that they should make sure the president of their university hasn't plagiarized.

There's been some issue with the board lately being not maybe as transparent as some people want on certain policy decisions.

They're making something that new board member Jim Bob was very vocal about being more transparent.

As soon as he got on the board.

How, you know that that original, the original look into the accusations.

They said, oh, we hired a law firm.

They said, everything's fine, but we're not going to tell you who the law firm is.

We're not gonna tell you why.

We hired a law firm to investigate plagiarism, and we're not going to tell you what the report says.

Do you think even something like that would go a long way to settling this down for Pamela Whitten, if nothing would help?

You're talking about an institution that requires trust to operate.

It is a public institution.

It depends on our support collectively through taxation and also our largesse and our support of that institution and what it represents.

there's no quicker way to to turn people away, it seems to me, than to withhold information or to appear to be hiding something, or to be getting the finger to pat on the head and said, nothing here, move ahead.

Yeah.

So especially for a university, the notion of, of a public institution is let's put all the facts on the table.

Good ideas, bad ideas, the cauldron.

You know, that's the crucible in which these things are evaluated.

And that should be the case here.

But also in the academic world.

I mean, plagiarism is about short of actual crime.

I mean, it's about.

Yeah, I mean, about the worst thing you can do in academia.

So again, isn't hearkening back to a theme here of transparency.

Transparency.

Transparency is more transparency needed in all of this.

I do think that there should be a level of transparency as well as accountability.

We saw this also with the Harvard president and them accusing her of plagiarism.

But I will say that the stories around this and Brian, saying that there needs to be an investigation, he's calling for one, we're completely and utterly misinterpreted.

So we got to look at the content before the context.

And so two of the articles that came out about basically this, Brian versus Whitten, have already been revised and already been changed.

And that's not what he was saying.

What he was saying is if there was in a hypothetical situation, he would expect the trustees to act, not that he wants them to go on some type of crusade against President Whitten.

But I do believe that the reason this continues to come up is because there hasn't been that level of transparency.

And as an IU alumni, I believe we deserve that.

I mean, I.

Mean, that said, though, you know, for Mike Braun to be the moral authority on doing the right thing for any issue that involves, first of all, higher education.

And as you have already identified, the key component to trust with your academic, not only your students, but your faculty and your alumni circle, and you've got donor circles as well.

You've kind of a large and, you know, eclectic environment to consider in this.

So for that to be the, the, the moral authority is really curious to me because that is just that doesn't compute to me.

Jon, we've been talking about Pamela Whitten on this show for quite basically since she became president of IU.

there's been certainly some controversies over decisions she's made or her leadership.

I think a couple of years ago, I would have been shocked to hear Niki and I think rightfully say that she's fairly popular among Republicans at the state House.

But I think that's true.

Now, is that helping her a lot more in this case, that that public center Republican sentiment on Pamela Whitten has has shifted?

Well, she seems to have gained favor in recent years from Republicans in the legislature.

She's also and members of Congress, we should point out, as well, who have been critical of many other, administrators of large institutions.

and she's also, with the board.

I mean, you look at after, what, two.

None, no confidence votes from the faculty.

she got a raise and maybe an extension on the contract.

At least a raise.

don't hold me to the other.

So there's a Teflon aspect.

It seems to me the goodwill she has built up.

I will say that the plagiarism issues are going to become when somebody has an ax to grind, legitimate or not, because of our capabilities.

Now, to search things that weren't possible ten, 20 years ago.

This will be charged one any time we want to see.

Her only allegation of plagiarism either, I think, I mean, she's got her own Twitter account dedicated to exposing this, bitten by it.

And if you haven't seen it, it was also talking about how she allegedly, decided to, speak some same words that president McRobbie did at a commencement ceremony, not just a few years before the.

First time around.

Right?

I get it, but still.

I just want to add one thing.

If I was Pamela Whitten and I had a report that.

You know, that said I did nothing wrong.

I, I would I, I send that out myself.

Yeah, I get it.

But you also have lots of faculty, lots of students, lots of alums who are not happy.

And it's also that that gradation, when you talk about Joe Biden left the presidential race because of allegations Melania Trump delivered a speech that wasn't or was amazingly similar, wasn't it Melania Trump?

It was, I'm making up examples from both sides.

You could go right down to prime ministers.

I mean, yeah, it's.

Yeah, but it does.

It is something different in the academic research universe.

Yes, yes.

Otherwise it's a copyright violation in the real world.

Their trademark.

Yeah.

All right.

Indiana Democrats say pressure from the Trump administration to redraw districts is, quote, congressional shoplifting.

They joined Texas Democrats in Chicago this week to show support for their fight against redistricting efforts.

Texas Democrats fled the state to halt legislation to redraw congressional districts in favor of Republican candidates.

Indiana Representative Earl Harris says what is currently happening in Texas and what is being considered in Indiana, is voter disenfranchisement of black and brown communities.

My job is to help the people that I represent, not the guy in Washington, DC, Harris says.

This is a small part of a national fight.

Texas's here not only fighting for Texas, they're fighting for Indiana.

They're fighting for Illinois.

They're fighting for states all over this country.

Vice president JD Vance met with Indiana Republican leaders last week on a variety of topics, including redistricting.

Jon Schwantes, Indiana Democrats are in a very different position than Texas Democrats when it comes to how how much they can literally stop legislation from happening.

So can Democrats in Indiana have an impact on whether Republicans.

They can do what they're doing, which is shine a bright light on this?

I don't think there's an appetite.

Truth be known among Republicans to go down this path, because they have to explain why this map that they lauded is the greatest thing ever, because of the continuity we only, you know, only what is it, 8 or 11 counties are divided in any way, etc., etc.

so they have the fact that they loved it in the past and so they would have to unlove it, which is problematic.

I also think that Hoosiers have a fundamental sense of of common sense fairness about changing the rules midstream, and also to keep the maps the same for Republican leadership, especially, aside from rank and file.

Maybe there's some appetite for this.

But in terms of leadership, there's no risk now.

Right?

There are in supermajority.

So they can't get better really than they are.

What could happen, though, if they advocate for this in a public fashion?

And if Trump blows up and his legacy becomes an albatross, not something to be coveted, his support, but actually everybody who was supportive of all of this bad chapter, some would say in American history, we want all of you gone.

They have bought into that.

So why take the risk would be my point.

And we're starting to see some rank and file Republicans saying and.

Some not so rank and file.

Yeah.

But saying not quite what Jon just said, but I mean similar things.

Yeah.

They're definitely coming out, slowly against it.

And I give credit to them for making their positions known obviously far more or staying quiet, listening and going to see what they do.

But we're also seeing pressure mount.

I mean, we have political activists on Twitter calling out our House and Senate leaders.

We have the white House.

They've now they're having members to the white House on August 26th, just Republicans.

And that meeting was, scheduled before JD Vance came here.

But clearly, redistricting is going to be a topic right where we're getting robo calls and surveys on it.

So, yeah, I mean, the next few weeks is going to be crazy.

Yeah.

The Capitol Chronicle reported this morning about, a poll that's gone out about whether they should redistrict.

There was also a line in there about if they get called into a special session, they might undo or yeah, the property tax cut that they just did.

does that make a lot of sense to you in that poll?

Unless you're trying to like, unless it's a push poll to try and stop the special session for sure.

Don't know for sure that.

Yeah, no.

One's claiming.

It.

So it could be could be an effort to try and keep people from calling for a special session.

That or a distraction.

Any measure?

I'm not sure.

but, I mean, there's always a dubious poll question thrown into a poll.

The rest of them, it's very basic.

Yeah.

And so and they were also ID being for Republicans only.

I remember if that was correct.

I think they asked for all.

They asked for all.

Okay.

Forgive me.

So I didn't receive the call for full disclosure.

I never got one of those polls.

The poll and the call are different.

Yeah, but the robocall on the poll got it.

So, but yeah, I mean, you've got man, you've even got JD Prescott calling for this to be for no redistricting to occur.

This is what happens when you just got too much hunger on the supermajority side for something.

Those who have been in districts for just a little time that may not be such an entrenched incumbent.

See the writing on the wall and they're like, oh, I'm not so sure this is a safe seat for me.

So perhaps we shouldn't do that right now.

Well, I mean, someone who's been around for I mean, a couple readings are on redistricting.

I mean, I don't think there's a lot of occasions where Jim Lucas and Lindsay Haake are going to believe the same thing.

Jim Lucas is out here saying, hey, if there are areas where Republicans aren't winning, Republicans just have to do a better job of winning those areas.

Is that.

Twice a.

Day?

Is that going to sway people in Indiana as we make this decision?

I mean, absolutely, and shout out to Jim Lucas absolutely.

Being the voice of reason.

I don't think that he's often called the voice of reason.

But you heard it here first on Indiana.

We, I do think that Trump may have too much dip on his chip with this one specifically in Indiana.

It is interesting that they that our legislators went up to Illinois, which has been called one of the most gerrymandered states in the union.

But, I do understand them sticking together and advocating for what they believe is right.

I don't think Indiana Republicans have an appetite for this.

So the chip on the chip may stay in wash. That's going to be my new favorite.

Yeah, too much.

And I can.

Tell you though, folks calling Democrats out for going up to Illinois.

Man, when DC politicians left town for the Epstein files.

You know, I'm saying.

That's that's Indiana we can review for this week.

Our panel is Democrat Lindsay Haake.

Republican Whitley Yates.

Jon Schwantes, host of Indiana Lawmakers.

And Niki Kelly of the Indiana Capital Chronicle.

You can find Indiana Week in Reviews podcast and episodes at wfyi.org/iwir or on the PBS app.

I'm Brandon Smith of Indiana Public Broadcasting.

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

The views expressed are solely those of the panelists.

Indiana Week In Review is produced by WFYI in association with Indiana Public Broadcasting Stations.