>> Eye-popping campaign numbers in the governors race a no-confidence vote by IU faculty plus harassment allegations against a State Senator and more.

From the television studios at WFYI, it's Indiana Week in Review for the week ending April 19, 2024.

>> Indiana Week in Review is made possible by the supporters of Indiana public broadcasting stations.

>> This week, it campaign finance reports show Indiana six Republican candidates for Governor have spent more than $35 million in the most expensive primary in-state history with 20 million of that total coming in just the last three months.

>> Despite raising far less than her other opponent Suzanne Crouch has a significant financial advantage into the final weeks of the campaign, Kraut has more than $3 million cash on hand while none of her five opponents has more than 1 million.

Still, US Senator Mike Braun, Brad Chambers and Eric Doden probably won't struggle for money in the run-up to primary election day, those three combined raised nearly $12 million so far this year while spending almost 18 million.

Curtis Hill and Jamie Reitenour on the outside looking in when it comes to money, he'll had 16,000 in his account in Reitenour 6000 in her.

Is the money making any demonstrable difference?

It's the first question for our Indiana Week in Review panel, Democrat Lindsay Haak.

Republican Chris Mitchem, Jon Schwantes, host of Indiana Lawmakers, and Niki Kelly, editor in chief of the Indiana Capital Chronicle.

I'm Indiana public broadcast date bureau chief Brandon Smith, Chris, is the money moving the race at all?

>> I think there's two perspectives you could take on that question, the one I think most people would adopt is, you know, whenever one has such an advantage, such a large pile of money, when everyone has an advantage does anyone really have an advantage?

There's only so much dollars now, I can guarantee you each candidate would rather be in the position they are in then $1 million low or something like that but I think they are mostly just following campaign 101.

Reserving a lot of it for the final three weeks, you are going to see your TVs and radio waves blasted with all kinds of good stuff.

>> More than you already have, which doesn't seem possible but it's going to happen.

>> Then there's a second perspective which I think you could flip that and say money actually means everything because we said at the very onset of this, the barrier to entry because the money is going to be so high, so in a way if you just slacked for a month, 1/4, all of a sudden you look up and you are $2 million behind your opponent, the ferocit and the momentum of this fundraising has had to be maintained throughout this whole time in order to even stay competitive.

So I find it pretty impressive that the big four campaigns have been able to identify so many different piles of people, because you can talk about all the personal ones you want but each campaign had over $1 million of individual campaigns-- country visions as well so you can find talk to people I can keep these campaigns of low.

>> In terms of the money making difference in the limited goal we've seen, Curtis Hill and Jamie Reitenour aren't moving much, and they just don't have the resources to blanket the airwaves the other four have.

>> You just don't have the opportunity to gain any headway with earned media at this point.

For our come from behind campaign like that, you just don't.

I know Jamie has struggle to do that this weekend although she recalled a press release yesterday three times for some reason,-- >> Then sent it out from someone else.

>> Indeed, that was curious to me.

But no way earned media is going to do it for you at this point I would love to see how Suzanne is making a real gangway push and forgive Ms Suzanne Crouch that that's really for me as a Democrat outsider looking to this race, particularly curious for me because a lot of people say she doesn't have a chance.

I really think she does and I think she has shown not only just the yard sign game, to start playing those outside optics, and it's clear she's raising a ton of money, that cannot be dismissed.

>> Yeah, raising a ton of money and she is one of the big four.

Are raising all this money.

Who wasn't loaning herself a bunch of money.

>> And to be fair, she is done all of her fundraising through very traditional means.

You know, she didn't send any money back from her U.S. Senate campaign, she didn't get any money from her parents, she didn't give herself $8 million loans.

All of her money is raised in a grassroots level.

Now, she definitely has the most money going into the final weeks but she's also spent the least.

Coming up.

So the question is, is it enough to get her over the hump?

And time will tell, but she's put herself in a tough spot.

>> That's been appointed also campaigned on to.

At public events were she specifically said she's done this, she's raise this money, she's not had to come-- to did this the kind of nepo baby concerns of some of her competitors.

>> Many say Braun is going to win this race, and the pulling would suggest Braun has significant advantage.

All the poles we've seen, Braun is clearly front-runner with everyone else of fairways back.

And there is a significant undecided group out there, but that group is getting smaller as we see more polls come out.

So is this going to be 35, $40 million spent for the outcome you probably could've predicted a year and 1/2 ago?

>> What a cynical way to look at things?

And you work in broadcast, think about who the beneficiary is of all these!

>> Not the public-- >> Commercial broadcasting, not-- definitely not.

I would think certainly Ron we-- Braun is definitely ahead, but I don't have access to pulling that would let me say that with any certainty but I think one of the dangers of course of being out in front for as long as he has is you are out in front for as long as he has and guess what, you become then the subject of so many of the attacks and you become-- you start to wear thin.

This is like a mile race you don't want to go into that last lap necessarily looking around wondering where everybody is behind you, you want to be tucked in there, I've never won a race of this length in my life but I hear tell this is what you do, you talking over somebody's shoulder and come out where you have the advantage of the kick at the end end so may be if he doesn't win it may be a matter that I don't want to say peaked too soon but he just had the exposure and again we are already suggesting it is a doubt from whatever we think but certainly being a front runner for months and months and months carries some disadvantages, as strange as it is to construct a that way.

>> Indiana University's Bloomington faculty has declared no confidence in President Pamela Whitten, Provost Raul Shrivastav, and I can a big affairs carry, number of faculty voted and didn't overwhelming number express no confidence.

>> While a few dozen faculty voted in, particularly poiting to disrespect of academic freedom and failure to share governance faculty cannot remove a leader from the University and Bloomington faculty Council President Colin Johnson says the vote is advisory.

>> That does not mean expressions of the faculties elective will are inconsequential however.

>> Whitten responded with any will to faculty encouraging them to share their opinions and she says she pledges to listen and learn.

The Board of Trustees also responded saying in a statement fully supports Whitten and is confident in her vision and leadership.

>> Lindsay, how concerning is the situation?

>> It worries me for one reason, and that is because we are going into a budget year of course we are going to have a very extensive conversation during ways and means for each of our universities in Indiana.

And with got a very calm located budget situation already with the Medicaid-- we will call it "Mistake."

in forecasting.

So you've got a very tenuous issue here that's ugly rumbling underground a little bit, but the I UPI faculty also did not vote in no confidence they chose not to bring the vote forward so I don't necessarily think this is the biggest issue, but obviously this hasn't happened since Adam Herbert.

And less than one year later he was out the door.

So I think you've got some concerns, obviously, on the greatest weekend in college intramural sports with the little five starting as we tape now, I've got to say I'm obviously not worried about IU being anything but a force for good.

>> Should-- I mean this isn't happening in a vacuum.

Is coming off the Senate Bill 202 debate on legislative session where lawmakers were clearly expressing frustration with higher education, the state of higher education.

And this no confidence vote is coming from the other direction of that.

Heading into a budget cycle where I think things are probably about to get a lot tighter across the board because of how much money we will have to spend in certain areas.

How concerning is the situation?

>> I never thought I would genuinely line up on the side of, you know, the administrative side of a higher education institution, I never would but I really enjoyed with the IU Board of Trustees came out and said which is what I also believe, she's in a no-win situation here.

You have pressure from the general assembly on one side saying hey Emma you need to make sure you are embracing intellectual diversity and also hey, you just defined anti-Semitism which always they got vetoed, but the effort was there.

So now we expect you to crackdown more on that.

Then you have from the other side all the organs about the no-confidence vote came from kind of social pressure to things, most of the times in your no vote of confidence it's a big curriculum change or big financial change, something like that.

Most of these came from the fact you weren't pushing back against the general assembly hard enough for you made somebody with, pro-Palestinian views take down some artwork or something like that.

So you have the general assembly over here saying one thing, you have the people under you saying another thing.

So I think the Board of Trustees actually did a really great job saying this is a hard situation, college campuses across the United States are facing this issue so we stand behind her, we stand behind the vision that she has.

Although it is worth noting if more than 50% of your faculty agree on anything that is worth concerned.

>> Does this fall under the category of if both sides are angry were probably in the right spot in the center?

>> I wouldn't say that, I think it's problematic.

I say this as a proud graduate of Indiana, and my daughter is at the offer mentioned race that is starting at this moment.

Was troubling about it is not even yes, there are budgetary issues, perhaps in the ongoing problems that you described billing under the surface.

That may be a challenge but the bigger challenge I think when you see a vote of no confidence is in recruiting of faculty in terms of research funding, which is so hypercompetitive now.

We all talk about an enrollment cliff that the demographics are such and that applies primarily to the undergraduate population and maybe undergrads aren't as attuned to this may be motivated by football records, basketball records and they college weekend but when you look at faculty hiring and looking at getting the best and the brightest and you look at the incredible competition in all disciplines for federal dollars for philanthropic dollars and other sorts of things, that's where I think you have a bigger?

Surrounding a vote of no confidence.

Not necessarily as much with the general something.

>> They did have a very successful IU day where they raised a ton of money.

>> In terms of that concern Jon just mentioned, and we also-- at a time in the state where we are continuing to harp on the need for people with some sort of postsecondary attainment.

And we are doing very well we just had the higher education-- state of higher education address, we are fifth in the nation in credentials and things like that, that's great, we are middle of the pack overall in the country for postsecondary attainment.

Which means we are struggling on college degrees which are still important in a lot of fields.

Is that-- >> Struggling on college degrees is not just Indiana though.

This is a national issue of a lot of younger people have, due to the cost, begun to question what they are getting, you know, from those degrees.

I think that is separate.

I get that 30% is a lot of people, but it is still nowhere near-- I mean you could argue 70% are fine with her, you know?

>> Didn't show up even to the meeting.

>> Exactly.

So I'm not sure how big of a deal it is, you know, I think it is interesting, I think it is something to watch out for, but I don't think it's going to cause much.

>> Now I you come in this competition for talent, faculty talent and others, so many other schools, state schools, or having the very same challenges across the country, it's one of those things where it's not as if this is the only place we are seeing upheaval.

So I mean-- >> And they are all social upheaval.

They are not unhappy with their payer their work.

Know what I mean?

With internal stuff.

It's all about social issues that are on the way outside.

>> That's still an issue for faculty, but the Sharon shouting-- is not-- >> it's not happening within the state.

$$TRANSMIT's >> you can't when the issues you are going to upset someone on either sides of the hope is this current state kind of calms down after a while, but when it comes to, you know, being able to make decisions and that kind of atmosphere you are going to take somebody off.

>> But on the faculty hiring I don't think it's 50-50, I think that's where it could hitch you in terms of some of them-- hurt you.

>> I think we haven't issue with recruitment in Indiana across the board on all sides.

>> Time now for fewer feedback, each weekly post an unscientific online poll, this week's question is are you confident in IU University's President Emily Whitten, A, yes, B, no.

Last week 71% of you said yes and 21% said no if you'd like to take part in the polls say have you FYI.org/IW IR look for the pole.

I was a little surprised at the results of that one.

An opinion piece by IndyStar Columnist James Briggs revealed this week Indiana Democratic party officials have largely ignored allegations of sexual harassment against State Senator David Niezgodski.

>> The allegations come from the father of a former employee of Niezgodski's former business in detailed part in a case with the Indiana civil rights commission years ago bricks reported there was a settlement in the case.

The father of the alleged victim spoke with Briggs and provided text messages and voicemails appear to show Niezgodski relentlessly pursue the woman even as she quit her job and told him to stop.

The woman's father appealed to Democratic party officials years ago who didn't pursue the allegations.

@ >> Thank you, Kelly.

As was played out in the piece, Democratic party leaders rightfully called the GOP leaders for avoiding these cases against Diego Morales years ago, is this just as bad?

>> Also have to remember the Curtis Hill instant incident which Republicans tried to bury in a report and only when it was leaked to that come to light.

So yeah, it's not good.

The emails in the voicemail are pretty damning, and you know, he's in the middle of a race and that's probably why this is coming out now, even though it happened so many years ago.

It also was at his private business, not Senate related, you know, staff, state employees.

But at the same time, as a voter I can see wanting to know stuff like this.

If he's a married man who was really putting it hard on a single mom who clearly did not-- didn't want the advances.

>> In terms of the impact he has-- he is up from primary and what is expected to be a relatively safe Democratic seat, the race is in the primary like somebody seats in the general assembly now.

And he has a legitimate opponent, sometimes you see people just throw their name in the ring, this is the county-- I think the county Treasurer in St Joseph County.

Is this the sort of thing that can take down an incumbent?

>> Maybe, I don't have my finger on that particular race.

His campain is stressing his empathy for women and the challenges they face in terms of everything from-- there is an allusion to reproductive rights and other sorts of issues in terms of the tangible and intangible costs women in society face in so many aspects of their lives.

I don't know if there is a cause-and-effect tear, if that's the tone of the campaign or the messaging was in anticipation of this are in response to this, I don't know.

And I mean, I've seen the polling, anything would be a finger in the wind in terms of what I'm guessing.

Would it lessen margin of victory?

Maybe.

But keep in mind this is somebody who is seeking 1/3 term in Senate, he is not an unknown commodity.

So people, I think this type of-- these stories and allegations while certainly serious and no one is trying to downgrade them at all, if you are an unknown and just arriving on the scene I think these sort of allegations can take higher toll than if somebody says " That's Dave, I've known him for-- of going to church with him, done business with him."

and maybe that is a mitigate or for those who will-- it helps.

He plays to his - advantage I think politically.

>> From a purely political sense in terms of when this is sort of hitting the newsstands if you will, to use an old parlance, is it a little too late in the race for it to bake a significant impact?

>> No, like I mentioned earlier, you know, you kind of save all your arsenal for this time, right?

Because when people start tuning in and saying there's a primary coming up I should probably figure out who's on the ballot, but I'm I going to do?

>> Even though we are two weeks in early voting so much of the time it feels like people who vote early are the ones who, they knew going in, they've known for a long time what they were going to do.

>> Exactly, when you take into that sense that's the first thing you see, even if you are not super plugged in, even if you are one of the people to kinda focus on more higher- level races, the Governor, presidency, Congress, stuff like that.

State Senator which is arguably more important and more impactful and maybe if you don't arriving about that race versus others this is the first thing you see, you know, the incumbent Star can only get you so far.

So I think this could have an impact which is certainly disappointing, just because Senator Niezgodski is one of the more moderate I guess you could say Democrats, working across the aisle.

>> In terms of the party it's noted in the piece that a lot of party officials that alleged victim's father was trying to get attention from our no longer in those leadership positions.

The county party chair is different, the state party chair is different, from that time but does there need to be somewhat of a reckoning within the Indiana Democratic party as to how the party handles these issues?

>> Needs to be reckoning at the Indiana State House.

I mean this is not a Democrat or Republican issue by any way shape or form.

This is a problem when I was on staff years ago and it's a problem since day one.

This is a product of the systemic patriarchy that built our legislature and our form of government.

And so, this needs to be on leadership's shoulders to elevate on an important issue and hopefully address.

>> Indiana public access Council Luke Brett release an informal opinion last December stating the information gathered from terminated pregnancy reports, or TPRs, could be used to identify patients especially in smaller communities.

Indiana public broadcasting Abigail Ruhman reports, Todd Rokita recently released an advisory opinion that says the decision to not disclose them complicates enforcement of Indiana law.

>> Rokita says the reports of them publicly available since the 1970s but there was an abrupt change of policy following Rick's opinion.

However with fewer patients receiving abortions the Indiana Department of health raise concerns that releasing the full individual reports could violate patient confidentiality.

Especially with increased reporting requirements added in 2022.

Rokita claims the report should be release in their entirety despite the enforcement and the patient's privacy concerns is that the IDOH could redact information that could be used to identify patients, Britt's opinion says the statute requires the IDOH to provide aggregated data in a public report suggesting the individual forms are nonpublic.

Neither opinion is legally binding.

>> Jon Schwantes, as journalists, your First Amendment absolutist for the most part.

We always want as much access to records as possible, increasingly find we don't have as much access as we would like.

In this situation, how should we feel about this?

>> I hate to make any argument against public disclosure, but in this case we do have an exemption in the public record statute that relates to medical records, specifically in terms of not aggregate data where you can look at, you know, mortality trends but in terms of the patient records and interaction with the physician and the patient.

This already seems to be covered in existing statute.

When you look at issues of public importance, and why I think not just journalists but the public at large should have access, it's about how to dollar-- public dollars are allocated, and how decisions are made and shapes and perhaps distorted or deflected by outside influences.

Whether it is money, financial gain or prospects or whatever.

You look at what, as a state, some of the same people who think these, Todd Rokita and others who think the records should be open are the quickest ones to say you shouldn't have access to who is selling death penalty drugs to the state of Indiana, that is an exception that was sort of stuck in on the Supreme Court weighed in on the Supreme Court on a different manner that was snuck into I believe a budget bill.

At the 11th hour to keep the public from knowing something about, arguably, an important aspect of public policy which is how we decide to take the life of someone else in the name of justice.

We see the same thing with gun ownership heaven forbid anyone ever see who owns guns on either sales records or gun permits, not that you even need a gun permit anymore but back in the quaint days of when you had concealed carry permits, those were often outside the public's purview as well, under statute.

Arguably, one could say that should not have been excluded.

>> I will draw more direct connection with Todd Rokita specifically, he went after Doctor Caitlin Bernard for talking to a newspaper about a abortion procedure she performed on a ten-year-old rape victim from Ohio and said she said enough things to make it obvious who this was.

Even though she never said the person's name.

Isn't most of that information also sort of available from these TPRs?

>> That is true but I do want to clarify, I've gotten these TPRs before and when we've gotten them that information is redacted.

So you know, they redact the age and the county and how many pregnancies they had before.

Their education background.

So I couldn't reverse engineer it.

And I hate to disagree completely with you, I know there's an exception for medical records, but that was the same exception in the state law that was in effect last year-- >> Is there a difference here though between hundreds of abortions and TPRs every month versus at the very small number?

>> I get that, but again, reactions.

You can redact the identifying information and still release the document.

>> Will that's Indiana Week in Review for that week, our panel is Democrat Lindsay Haak, publican Chris Mitchem, Jon Schwantes of Indiana Lawmakers, and Niki Kelly of the Indiana Capital Chronicle.

You can find Indiana Week in Review's podcasts 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 opinions expressed are solely those of the panelists.

Indiana Week in Review is a WFYI production in association w