Senate Democrats oust Taylor from leadership.

A modest revenue forecast.

Plus, frustration over Medicaid forecasting and more.

From the television studios at WFYI, It's Indiana Week in Review for the week ending December 20th, 2024.

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

Additional support is provided by the Indy Chamber, working to unite business and community to maintain a strong economy and quality of life.

This week, Indiana Senate Democrats elected a new leader, ousting Senator Greg Taylor from the role.

The move came after an Indianapolis Star Story this week revealed three more women are accusing Taylor of sexual harassment.

The star first reported allegations against Taylor last month, which Taylor at the time did not deny.

The Senate Democratic Caucus then reelected Taylor to his post of minority leader.

This week, another star report revealed more allegations and Taylor renounced his previous apology, denying any wrongdoing.

But the caucus voted him out of leadership, replacing him with Bloomington Democrat Shelly Yoder.

In a statement, the Senate Democratic Caucus thanked Taylor for his dedicated services Minority Leader and said Yoder brings a wealth of experience and a passion for advocacy to her new role.

Where do Senate Democrats go from here?

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

Democrat Ann DeLaney Republican Chris Mitchem.

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.

Ann DeLaney, Taylor is now denying everything, He's saying the statement last time that didn't the didn't deny wrongdoing was because his PR firm sent it out without his approval.

So now he's saying none of it happened.

So what changed in caucus to oust him?

Oh, I think the additional I, I think there was a fair amount of buyer's remorse the first time around.

Taylor never should have run.

Okay, shouldn't have run, and they should not have elected him.

And I think they got so much pushback from fellow Democrats about that election that once another allegation came out, that was the perfect reason to revisit the question.

I think Shelly Yoder is going to be a very effective leader, very good spokesperson for the party and all.

And, you know, I can't believe, frankly, that if, if you don't think you've ever done anything wrong and somebody tells you to admit it, did you go ahead and do it for PR purposes?

I don't think so.

I mean, he's trying to backfill on this.

I'm glad he's no longer the leader.

As I said when we had this discussion a week ago.

He never should have run in the first place.

So it's this is a good outcome.

If the Senate Democratic Democratic Caucus now do you move forward?

Is this now in the rearview mirror or is this going to still be an issue for them?

I think it still will be just because of the overall general conversation about what do you do going forward now?

Do you continue to investigate?

And I think that's not only a Senate Democrat question.

That's a state House question regarding the whole legislature, not an R or a D issue.

And, to Anns point, I think Senator Yoder, she is a Bloomington Democrat.

So take that for what you will.

But I do think just from.

Progressive and articulate.

Well, she's definitely progressive.

She's definitely progressive, certainly.

But I will give her credit of, you know, the opportunities I've had to work with her in my role at the state House.

She is a very dynamic thinker.

She she does not take any assumptions when it comes to a D or an R issue.

She will hear you at she asks really good questions, I think, and I think she will be a solid leader for them going forward.

I don't think this issue goes away and even, you know, I find it quite repulsive a little bit that we even try to bring a race card into this a little bit.

I mean, even in his statement after the first round of allegations, he says as a black Senate Democrat and I'm like, what?

None of the allegations mentioned black, none of the alleged victims mentioned anything about black.

So the fact that he tries to kind of put that in the front and tries to bring that card into it, and I think is really disappointing from that end.

In terms of moving forward.

It's not like Greg Taylor has left the caucus entirely.

He's still going to be in that caucus, presumably still be in that caucus room.

He's certainly going to be on the Senate floor.

What does that do to the dynamic for the upcoming session?

And it's not as if you can just get lost in the crowd.

You know, if hundreds of people, we're talking ten people in the caucus.

So, there is no slouching down in the back of the room.

And we don't know what wounds were inflicted in caucus meetings when these votes took place, and what factions emerged.

And, I mean, we got a little bit of that and some flavor about who wasn't going to serve in a leadership position.

For instance, Shelly Yoder declined to maintain a leadership position the first a few weeks ago, when in fact, Greg Taylor was going to be the minority leader.

now she sort of leapfrogs Andrea Hunley to move.

I think the top job here probably to help her.

But so we don't know what what blood was spilled and how much ill will and venom.

I mean, being a super minority does have a way of bringing people together, because they will see that as they deal with issues such as many things we'll probably talk about today, school choice, universal school choice, and other issues that, they need to stay together as a caucus.

That will be a unifying force.

But again, it's it's ticklish.

but this had to happen.

Otherwise.

Every time he spoke on an issue, there would be the baggage, you know?

But after the comma, Senate Minority Leader Greg Taylor, who is still dealing with...

Accused of sexual harassment, but.

We do have an articulate minority leader now who, she she checks on the boxes, you know, college, senior lecturer.

she's a pastor.

An ordained pastor.

She former Miss Indiana.

What more could you want?

somebody who can get.

Maybe she could play basketball, too.

Maybe that's in the resume, I don't know.

if you're the Senate Democratic Caucus, kind of.

The question I ask, Chris, where do you go from here on this issue in particular?

Oh, on that issue, I would if I were them, I would just try to move past it, you know, focus on legislative business.

Because a lot of these allegations, while terrible, are really, really old.

And so I'm not sure what they can do.

Yeah.

Going back 8 or 10 years beyond, you know he's no longer leader.

And that's I think a good move.

They don't want to put someone up there who has that.

But I think in general you move forward and I hope the legislature as a whole kind of learns a lesson.

I think someone sent me and I hope this is right.

But, you know, they have to do annual sexual harassment training, but I don't think it's happening until March.

So we're really so the first two months real free for all.

Safe house.

Well.

It has been in the past.

Yeah.

All right.

Well, Indiana lawmakers of both parties this week said they're cautiously optimistic about the state's financial situation ahead of writing a new two year state budget.

A forecast unveiled Tuesday predicts the state will add about $800 million across both years of the new budget.

The forecasted revenue growth is about 3% in the first year and essentially flat in the second, just a 0.3% increase in revenue.

Senate Republican budget architect Ryan Mishler says, writing the new budget requires caution.

This is the reason we have strong reserves, so I think we're in a good place.

Indiana's Medicaid program will likely take up a bigger and bigger portion of the state budget.

And Democratic Representative Greg Porter says hard decisions must be made.

We can't build our budget on the back of the most vulnerable Hoosiers children and our seniors.

Lawmakers will receive another revenue forecast in April, shortly before they finalize the new budget that takes effect in July.

Chris, should Hoosiers feel cautiously optimistic about the upcoming budget?

Ehh.

I mean, I mean, I know the the messaging is coming out saying that they're cautiously optimistic, but I do think in reality, that's probably more of what they're saying is it's not the worst thing in the world.

But obviously with the situation they are, it certainly could be better.

And I do think a lot of credit has to go to the previous budget riders of maintaining those reserves, because I think this is a totally different conversation.

If we don't have those, we've already seen some of the reserve to use to help kind of, sustain the loss that, from the Medicaid budget.

So, I think a lot of credit has to go through them.

And Medicaid is the problem, right?

You're at the point now where it's beginning to outpace our projected revenue, which is a problem which I think now really puts the onus on legislators to come up with some kind of solution, whether that's raising the syntaxes, whether that's changing the qualifications for Medicaid.

I think that is really the highlight of all of this, that are going to force people to have to really kind of narrow down and find a solution.

$800 million sounds like a lot of money to the average person.

And of course, to the average person.

It absolutely is.

I'm certainly going to buy one of those lottery tickets.

but $800 million in the context of a $46 billion budget, right?

Is isn't a lot.

No.

And so cautiously optimistic.

somewhat.

I mean, we've obviously paid down the pension, obligation to use up some of those reserve funds, which could come in handy to keep people on Medicaid.

But we have I mean, there are there are thing and that's going to be paid off at some point in the not very distant future, which will generate more revenue.

We can always stop cutting taxes, because there are things we need to do as a state.

I mean, the idea that we're not following through on the promises we made about preschool, we're not following through on, assisting, parents in getting quality daycare.

we're cutting college scholarships.

We're cutting the O'Bannon College scholarships.

I mean, we don't have enough college graduates.

These are not the kinds of investments that, we should be cutting.

We should be looking towards those to build a future.

It's very narrow minded of of the the majority to think only in terms of cutting.

I mean, we made promises to people on some of these things, and we need to follow through.

I mean, we're talking about expanding vouchers to to the wealthiest people.

Or I remember when that program started, wasn't it, to poor children and failing schools.

you know, I don't know that qualifies as a failing school, but, I mean, those are the kinds of things that we need to reexamine.

We made promises, we need to keep those promises, and we need to stop letting the camel's head under the under the tent here for these programs for the rich.

Ryan Mishler talked about this, and I thought this was interesting.

He said, it used to be that you built the budget by starting with K-12 education and go, okay, how much are we going to increase that and then build the rest of the budget out from that, he said.

Now it's Medicaid.

We're having to start from Medicaid and work backwards from that.

Are we seeing a fundamental shift in how Indiana has to build its budget?

Well, it's because Medicaid is an entitlement.

So they can't you know, they can't just say, no, you're not getting your coverage.

and an 800 million again, sounds great, but the first year of the Medicaid forecast was an additional 400 million in cost.

So, I mean, that just gives an example that just eats it up right away.

And then if you consider 1 or 2% for education, which doesn't keep up with inflation, by the way.

No, you know, that would be another 200 million.

So I mean it's basically gone there.

Now, I think governor Mike Braun is going to be interesting to watch because he is saying that, you know, he's going to have agencies come in with cuts and start at a different below baseline.

So we'll see how much of that he can do.

And maybe that can stretch that 800 million further.

But at the same time, you know, we heard about, you know, maybe raising some of the sin tax.

The cigarette tax has been a popular one in the House side of the building.

Not still not so much on the Senate side, but on the Senate side, we've seen, particularly Senator Mike Kreider, who's passionate about mental health, talking about putting a fee on the cell phone bill, to, to fund, you know, things like nine, eight, eight, those are certainly options.

And that polling has told us for a long time that if there's one tax or one, you know, certainly I don't know about the fee, but one tax that most people are kind of comfortable with, it's the cigarette tax.

Is this the year that we find that lawmakers finally go, well, I guess we don't have any other choice.

Or if I'm not mistaken, there already.

We have cigarette tax money that goes directly to Medicaid coffers.

it's dwarfed, of course, by federal dollars and will continue to be dwarfed by federal dollars.

But there's already precedent there.

So it's a matter of increasing it.

And it's not just, as you point out, Brandon, polling, but you look at the coalitions that have been put together in past budget, years, hundreds of organizations, notably the chamber, often waving the flag.

and these are not organizations without considerable clout, and they have not been able to deliver because they have been sounding this drumbeat now for probably ten years.

Yeah.

saying this is the way to do it now.

Also not organizations that are regularly like, let's raise taxes.

I mean, the chamber is not known, as, you know, the crazy liberals who just want to, you know, bleed you with tax dollars.

And, and so they have some, I guess, moral authority on that subject with certain constituencies or factions of the most supermajority caucuses.

So we'll see.

This may be a year because of necessity.

keep in mind this is also lawmakers gotten used to Covid money.

I mean, with that spigot was open for several years and it made things easy.

well, it only made them difficult because everybody wanted a piece of it.

that's a good kind of.

That's a good thing.

But now that spigot handle is turned to off, so that'll be an adjustment.

All right.

Indiana lawmakers expressed frustration this week, but the consulting firm largely responsible for preparing the state's Medicaid forecasts isn't taking accountability for its part.

In last year's billion dollar forecasting error.

One year ago, lawmakers learned that Indiana's Medicaid program would cost the state about $1 billion more than projected.

Tuesday, legislators grilled Jeremy Palmer, a principal at Milliman Indianapolis, the private company that leads the creation of that forecast.

Palmer repeatedly rejected the idea that the billion dollar error was a mistake at all.

Sir, I feel like I am the messenger of the financials, meaning that we are projecting.

I am not spending that money, nor did I squander any of that money.

Republican Senator Chris Garten says he doesn't think the state should be hiring or retaining companies that make billion dollar mistakes.

I go back to accountability and responsibility, and.

I'm sorry I haven't seen Milliman take any.

legislative.

Fiscal leaders said it's a good idea for the state to explore whether changing vendors for its Medicaid forecast is appropriate.

Niki, up to this from a year ago now, we haven't heard a lot of public talk from Republicans about consequences for Milliman after last year.

Does this week's hearing change that?

Yeah, I mean, I guess I have to admit, when it started and, Representative DeLaney was asking a question about it, and I thought that it would stop there because a lot of times, Republicans on the budget committee are pretty quiet.

And I notice went in.

He is, however, one of the notable Republicans who's often not.

He went in and he really wanted them to take it.

And, you know, I'm not sure he'd be calling for their firing if they just took responsibility.

But there was nothing in there.

I think he was essentially saying, weirdly, like, we got the numbers from them and, and so their numbers like basically bad input, bad output.

Right.

Yeah.

And so but it was really uncomfortable to watch and I'm not really sure.

I mean, now they've done another forecast.

So I'm not really sure what it does now to fire him a year later.

Yeah.

Not even sure how that would work with a contract.

Yeah.

If you're Milliman here, maybe maybe the actual answer is bad input, bad output.

Maybe maybe the answer from them really is there was nothing we could have done differently given what we were given.

But do you have to say it the way this I mean, do you have to just be obstinate about it and say, well, we didn't do anything wrong?

I don't know what you're talking about.

Like from a PR standpoint, at the very least.

Was this the right call?

Hey, accountants.

they don't take those soft skill courses and, how to polish things up, for public consumption.

Yeah, I'm sure there is another way to address it that would have been more satisfactory to those who were critical.

but the data were apparently, lagging a lot in most cases.

It was pre-COVID data.

Which things have changed?

it'd be like, you know, college Football Playoff panel committee doing last year's, you know, teams and player lineups and stats to, to put a field together for the playoffs.

You wouldn't like that, Jon.

I would not have liked that.

No, no, that's why it's top of mind as an example.

So, and there is a move to get the data, to, to rectify this so it doesn't happen in the future.

I just wonder, though, you know, they received that firm, received some economic development incentives to expand their operations here.

not too long ago and create new jobs, maybe things like, why did just might say that maybe I. Yeah.

Clawback the the question that was asked of lawmakers this week.

And I think that a lot of people are asking is why should we believe this forecast.

Yeah.

I mean, the idea that a conversation about what exactly went wrong, pointing to the actual Medicaid forecast provider, I'm sure that went on in the background.

Republicans and Democrats trying to figure out exactly what went wrong.

But to your point, just putting it out so publicly and not taking responsibility, I think is kind of where the rubber meets the road a little bit.

But just looking at previous forecasts, none of them were correct down to the decimal point.

Right.

It's a forecast.

It's a projection.

And you know, it's been incorrect in the past.

But whenever you get to $1 billion I think is where the concern happens.

So I think they're taking to account their credibility of previous forecasts.

I'm not sure how long they've been around doing the forecast, but I know it's been a while quite a bit.

So I think they're kind of using this one time error as a don't do it again, you're on a short leash now and continuing to use them going forward.

And I didn't put this in the piece.

But get both.

The Indiana medicaid director and Milliman talked about the fact that they put a lot more sort of controls in place.

The numbers are being run through a couple of different more checks, and they and they improved the, the data collection and, and, you know, communication process.

But in the immediate wake of last year's monthly reporting for.

Yeah, exactly.

Things like that.

Yeah.

But I'll ask again and Ryan Mishler said it.

Well, we kind of all agree we have to use the numbers we were given in terms of the forecast.

But is every lawmaker in that building going to be going?

I guess they should be.

They should be.

And you're right.

It's not going to be exact, but $1 billion difference.

Which is just a few percentage error.

It's a few percentage points.

It's a few it's a few percentage points.

Big number.

And you know, it's I hope that the Medicaid office and FSA is doing what they should do on this.

But, you know, it was very hard to get information from them about what went wrong.

And you've got to think to yourself, okay.

And good checks and balances, are they at least partially response able for this.

And if that were the case, why aren't more heads rolling?

All right.

Time now for viewer feedback.

Each week we pose an unscientific online poll question.

And this week's question is should Indiana Fire the consulting firm that generated the billion dollar Medicaid forecasting error, A yes or B no?

Last week we asked you whether state government should be responsible for funding more child care access.

74% of you say yes, 26% say no.

If you'd like to take part in the poll, got a fyi.org/iwir and look for the poll.

Well, Indiana Democratic Party chair Mike Schmuhl announced this week he will not seek reelection for the position at the end of his term in March, and one top Democrat has already thrown her hat into the ring for the job.

Schmuhl became the chair of the Indiana Democratic Party in 2021.

He didn't give a reason for his departure, but said in a statement, I know how hard it can be to be a Democrat in Indiana, and over the past four years, we have placed our party on a path to future success.

He touted the successes of the party in the last four years, including mayoral wins in Terre Haute, Evansville and Michigan City.

Destiny Wells, who has run unsuccessfully for two statewide offices in the last two years, wants to be the party's next chair.

In a statement, she says it's undeniable that the party must be reimagined before it can deliver consistent winning results.

Jon, what should Democrats be looking for in the next party chair?

Let's see.

Miracle worker no.

Aside from the the superhuman ability to deliver miracles, you want somebody, I think, who knows the state and is known by grassroots throughout the state.

And so to have somebody who has mounted campaigns and run for office, there's probably value there.

You don't have to get acquainted and go shake hands with everybody in 92 counties and say, hey, this is just, somebody who can raise money, somebody who, has a finger on on the, on the, on the zeitgeisty in our state and can formulate a message to respond to that and to appeal to voters and somebody who can recruit candidates, because in the end, more so than at any other level, when you're talking about more races, when you're talking about legislative races, it really is more about the candidates in some sort of sweeping, you know, overall force that's blowing either, you know, blue to red or red to blue.

If you're Destiny Wells, you're coming in saying we need to do things different.

Is she the right voice?

Having run for two state one offices in the last two years, is she the right voice to say we need to do something different?

Yeah, I mean, that's that's going to hurt her a little because while she has mounted these campaigns, they haven't done very well.

She has fundraised, I'd say average during those times.

And so, you know, that might hurt her a little.

Yeah.

But and also, I think she's not for I know she's from the central Indiana sort of donut.

And so I think a lot of Democrats in other parts of the state, but sometimes don't like that.

Although, you know, obviously my mom was from South Bend.

I'm the one before that.

Jon said he was in Bloomington.

So.

Bloomington.

Yeah.

what should Democrats be looking for?

Well, I think.

The return of the return of Ann DeLaney is very good.

I tell you, for either party, that's a thankless job.

Which is why you've gone through, what, three in the last 18 months.

It's, You need somebody who can.

Who can articulate a message, raise the money, do damage control, recruit candidates.

And there are a number of people who are out there, talking about seeking that office.

So I think we'll come up with the right kind of a candidate that can do those things.

And, you know, like I said last week, we were supposedly dead in the 80s, and then we had 20 years of control.

So it be the.

Tonight when you.

The reason for you to come.

There's a there's there seems to be not a small amount of interest in this position.

Are you a little surprised that the Indiana Democratic Party chair would be something that a lot of people want to be?

yeah.

Yeah, absolutely.

To your point, just of how thankless of a job it is, how much travel is included and really just the position you are.

But I think Indiana Democrats are saying, thank God for Destiny Wells, because it seems like any time there's an opening, whether it be secretary of state or treasurer, she's the she's the one that you pick.

And this seems to be the one, for the state party going forward.

I think that.

Two card finally, as we tape this episode, we are a few hours away from the Battle of Indiana as Indiana University and Notre Dame face off in the first round of the inaugural college football playoffs.

Chris Mitchem, who have you got.

As somebody without a dog in this race?

I will lean on Vegas.

I think it's a close one, but I think Notre Dame wins a close one.

As an IU alumnus, I have to go.

I have a person in this race, I want I you.

Notre Dame's won enough championships since I used her.

It's been a minute since Notre Dame has won a championship.

They have them.

They do, they do.

I don't really look.

I think either one can win, but I am fully behind IU because I think it's just the storyline.

It's true.

Amazing story.

I really think as a journalist that the more fun story is, are you drawn?

Are we done?

Because I'm going to the game.

Are you?

I said that at the beginning of the season.

I thought they do.

Well, I didn't know they do this.

Well, but it's something we should celebrate as a state.

Jon, I finally somebody.

Listen, Governor Holcomb had my favorite line, of asking this question, which was?

I asked him, recently, which team are you rooting for?

And he said, I'm rooting for one and praying for the other.

And that's a really good line for Hanover.

I'm I'm a Notre Dame fan.

Have been my, my whole life.

So I got to pull for the Irish.

real quick.

No, we did not talk on the show this week about the whole federal government, but budget showdown, because as we tape this, we have no idea what is happening.

So you're going to have to tune in to future episodes to find out what we think about how that all shakes out.

And that is Indiana Week in Review for this week.

Our panel is Democrat Ann DeLaney, Republican Chris Mitchem, Jon Schwantes of Indiana Lawmakers and Niki Kelly of the Indiana Capitol Chronicle.

You can find Indiana Week in Review 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 views expressed are solely those of the panelists.

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

Additional support is provided by the Indy Chamber, working to unite business and community to maintain a strong economy and quality of life.