A report finds Indiana has the highest percentage of children who lost Medicaid coverage.

The Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor petitions, case rate hike, and a record number of Democratic candidates are running for statehouse seats.

From the television studios at WFYI Public Media.

It's Indiana Week In Review.

For the week ending July 10th, 2026.

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

Additional support is provided by PA Ritchey.

A report finds Indiana had the highest percentage of children that lost Medicaid coverage than any other state.

Ben Thorp reports an estimated 20% of children who were on Medicaid had lost coverage since 2025.

Roughly 174,000 children in Indiana have lost Medicaid coverage since January of last year.

A spokesperson for the family and Social Services Administration said wage growth and new jobs in Indiana could partially explain declining Medicaid enrollment.

Joan Alker is the executive director of the center for Children and Families and authored the report.

She says the narrative that Medicaid enrollment is falling because of wage growth hasn't been historically true.

We heard the same argument in in the first administration.

No, it's fine that children are losing Medicaid because the economy so good, but then only got the census data.

That was not true.

Alker says declines in child enrollment should raise alarms for Indiana lawmakers.

What does a decline mean for the health of children in Indiana?

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

Political strategist Lindsay Haake.

Republican Whitley Yates.

Jon Schwantes, host of Indiana lawmakers.

And Caroline Beck, government reporter at WFYI.

I'm Samantha Horton, reporter and newscaster at WFYI.

Lindsay's report points to a 2025 state law that lawmakers passed to crack down on Medicaid fraud.

What do you think this means to see Indiana leading the nation in a percentage decline of children on Medicaid?

Yeah, it's, not great.

Bob.

Definitely not great.

as a disability advocate myself, obviously the concern is grave.

The concern is grave.

With this new data, 174,000 children, significant amount of kids to remove off of health care.

this is, an initiative aimed at the theater around this, welfare fraud and Medicaid fraud is just overwhelming at the state House and national level.

And I think it's just some, some unfortunate.

We just have to shout at the poor.

I'm not really sure why.

but we're just not happy enough unless we balance the budget on the backs of the poor and the disabled.

And that's unfortunately what we've done here in Indiana with the waiver program and now with, with Medicaid in general.

I'm really, really concerned.

I really, truly worry that kids are going to die.

And really, you know, you know, go look at support.

Do you feel like the that 2025 law was going maybe a little too far with the fraud now seeing what we're seeing with children being no longer on Medicaid?

No.

And I think context is important.

When Covid was happening, there were restrictions placed specifically on all states that we could not allow people to roll off of Medicaid, and we had to provide Medicaid in Indiana was just slow to kind of clear those rolls.

And now that we are no longer in the pandemic and people have been able to traverse the circumstances of that in, they're rolling off and no longer eligible.

And I think it should be something that we're looking at as a positive.

If more people are able to afford their own health care and not utilize Medicaid, it's a good thing for the state of Indiana.

I know, Jon, I know a big thing.

Lawmakers habitat is improving health for children in the state, I guess.

Could you talk about in context?

And when we see this, these numbers coming in?

What are state lawmakers going to have to look at.

Will be challenging because a lot of times lawmakers, critics of of the swollen what they would describe as swollen Medicaid rolls, they'll say, you know, we we designed this program initially for the disabled for for the chronically ill and for children.

Okay.

And in fact, a good percentage, if not more than half of the people in the state on Medicaid, I believe, are are under age or children or good percentage anyway.

And so it's kind of hard.

It's, it's tougher to be put them up, hold them up as a pinata and say, look, we're going after these scofflaws and cheats, because they are largely an innocent group.

Are there people who have rolled off the because of post-Covid, changes?

Undoubtedly.

But I would think it's naive to think that there aren't lots of people within that 100,000 plus figure that aren't now hurting.

and when we start talking about numbers, we do run into the risk of treating everything as categories or vertical or horizontal, you know, subsets of this, subsets of that.

We forget that they are people who do have health care challenges, who are struggling to get food on the table.

their parents are struggling to keep a roof over their heads and dealing with children who have a lot of disadvantages when they look at the kids around them.

So maybe we should all just, take a deep breath and look beyond the numbers, perhaps.

Good advice.

And this crackdown, I know on the Medicaid fraud, Caroline, I know a big part of it is because a state has been having to address an issue of the amount of money Medicaid is costing it.

I know can you talk about is, you know, what are we really seeing then with that?

Yeah.

Well, we've already heard from Secretary Mitch.

sorry.

Excuse me, Secretary Mitch Roob say that that even with these loss of Medicaid enrollment, we're still not seeing that.

that, cost seeing that cost saving being seen.

So I think the next interesting question that we're going to have to look at as like a state and as legislators look at this is when the, work requirements come in next year.

they've already said they're going to need to even have more staff come on to the FSA to even, like, look through those requirements, check what people actually are qualifying for.

And so that alone could then also increase the costs.

And having to pay for these extra workers.

So it's it's I think just a lot of unknowns.

Now if we're actually seeing cost savings as a state, even with all of these children now being off of their Medicaid coverage.

and I think, yeah, it's it childcare is a huge issue in Indiana.

It's something legislators often bring up.

So how are they going to deal with that in the next session?

Is a big question.

I'll have yeah.

I think that's something we're going to continue to follow here at WFYI with the work requirements go into effect next year for issue number two.

On Tuesday, the state's utility watchdog moved to stop a $71 million rate hike.

The Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor advocates for rate payers and its petition in the U.S.

case, the CC argues that the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission didn't fully consider affordability.

David Ober is a former commissioner with the Regulatory Commission.

What the SEC is asking is you made these judgment calls based on this evidence.

We're asking you to relay the evidence and a way that is more preferential to rate payers.

The petition also argues the increase unfairly places the burden of additional costs on ratepayers.

In a statement to WFYI, AES says it's reviewing the CCS petition and it will follow the state's process.

This petition comes after governor Mike Braun's negative response to the initial decision approved of the rate hike for.

Do you feel Braun is getting too involved in the IRC rate case decisions right now?

Absolutely not.

And as someone who is on a yes now, what a disconnect.

Notice in my mailbox as we speak.

We deserve an advocate.

And for him to say that for so many years, Hoosiers have tighten their belts.

And now it's time for the energy companies.

And as to tighten its own and not push the rate increases back on Hoosiers when affordability is a top issue and transparency is a top issue, is a problem.

You have families going from trustee's office to charities looking to get help, and it is imperative that someone advocates for us.

And if that is the governor of the state of Indiana, well, by golly, I'm glad that he's the one that's doing it because someone needs to.

And you know, Lindsay, I know this coming on time, too.

And we're seeing DNR even, like, having resignations, pointing to what they feel like the Braun administration is not letting them do their job, I guess.

Can you talk about this balancing of meeting, you know, what the administration wants, but also, you know, being an appointee of having your own in a way, your own role, not having to worry about your job if you don't fulfill certain once.

You ask, is such a curious body in Indiana, it is in many other states.

In fact, 45 other states.

They are ERC equivalent, the PUC, the Public Utility Commission, is elected, and these folks would be able to be held accountable by individuals at the ballot box.

That is not happening here.

I think Governor Braun's argument is rather with the legislature.

You're up on the third floor with all of these cadre of bills they've passed for the past decade under the Republican supermajority.

That gives the utilities every single thing they want with a tracker from the light switch all the way to the plant.

And that is a problem that cost Hoosiers more money.

And, you know, you're not alone with being in the disconnect.

Half of Indy is every territory is in a disconnect status, whether that be 30 day or 60 day.

It is intense, in its, affordability problem that needs to be solved on the legislature, on the legislative branch side of things.

I appreciate Governor Braun's advocacy, but this is a scenario where the the quasi judicial body of the of the IOC must act independently.

That is literally its job.

And so having a lot of involvement, I don't think is helpful.

And I think it really is the point is criticism to the third floor.

Let's see this where when talk to you all about Caroline is, you know, this is really testing Braun's power a little bit too, I guess could talk about that.

And as well as really pushing back to what lawmakers are needing to do to address this issue.

Yeah, I think this will be a really interesting test for the governor, because, I mean, if this new rate is approved, then what was all of his influence and input then ultimately leading to?

And we've already, you know, heard from some lawmakers say, you know, I think this influence that Braun is having there, you know, kind of saying it's a political show of his power.

But, they're questioning like, well, what are Indiana's laws about?

IURC governance?

And should we be actually looking at those to change that, to inflict, you know, how much power the governor actually has to make these decisions because, you know, it was Governor Braun's choice to put Andy Zay in the position, and now he has gone.

So, yeah, I think that will be something legislators will probably want to take a look at next year.

I can see the interest already there.

Yeah.

And that, you know, it.

Should there be limitations the governor has to appointing and then pulling back an appointment so abruptly when he doesn't care for the decision they make?

Is their idea of like creating more independence for this agency, a little bit of not having to feel like if they don't make one person specifically happy.

He didn't violate the statute, as far as I know.

So and we have, seemingly great deference these days to executive officers, whether they're in the white House or in governor's offices.

And and I think there's an inclination among these people to push it as far as they can, and they're seen as being activists.

They're seen as being champions of of the little guy.

And so if they get spanked in the process, at least they have been fighting the good fight.

I think we see more and more of that in politics.

You don't have to necessarily have the solution in mind.

You can just be angry and fight.

Yeah, it probably is.

I mean, you can look at this as a practical implication or as political, practical, because laws to govern and presumably would have recourse to the courts if, in fact, they show that that the IURC ignores what the General Assembly has enacted as the law of the state of Indiana.

And that's not going to be pretty.

But it wouldn't.

But what's happening now wouldn't necessarily affect that.

Other than drag out the inevitable.

Inevitable, perhaps.

But from a political standpoint, for the reasons I just mentioned, I totally get it.

chief executives, they score points when they wade into issues, that are outside their, their purview, their, their traditional purview.

Because, again, it especially if it's an issue that people understand and appreciate, like my monthly utility bills.

Hey, I get that.

I feel that if somebody is going to step into the void or seem to overstep even on my behalf, it's great.

It's like when a president, you know, calls up FIFA to contest a red card.

I mean, that has nothing to do with anything.

And there are a lot of people who are unconcerned by that.

But a lot of other people said, that's our guy.

Titans in the good fight.

That's the kind of fight this actually sets up.

If that does indeed occur, because then you'll have Todd Rokita involved, you know, and then you will have just a mishmash of just the the the colliding priorities.

Speaking of performative, there could be an Academy Award, in silver here for this this run.

Yeah.

And so if that case is indeed overturned, you know, and that and I. Yes, it should be and they should have the, the conversation more so because a lot has happened in this whole conversation with a yes.

Since this was filed.

Originally you had the Monrovia Google data Center project, proposed.

You also just a slew.

And so Blackrock I mean let's talk this is huge.

And having P come in and take over Indiana's first investor on utility is giant.

So there are a lot of competing issues I think that's really awesome.

So you serve at the pleasure of the governor.

And if the governor is it please you may be replaced.

If God said let there be light.

And Brown is trying to help make sure that the lights stay on.

I think we should all thank him.

A round of applause.

Yes, I think that is something we can all agree on.

And that is where we need to focus and why.

I think we have to involve the third floor.

It's just I just don't see how it happens without him.

And so going on to our poll question here, it's that time.

Now for viewer feedback.

We propose an unscientific online poll question.

This week's question do you think the governor should be directly involved in energy rate change decisions?

Vote yes or no.

Last week question posed to viewers.

Local road funding be impacted by the state's gas tax holiday answers 77% said yes, 23% said no.

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

Democrats are running 97 of Indiana's 100 state House races, many then more than any point in decades.

Ethan Sandweiss reports.

The party hopes running on affordability issues can help it break the Republican supermajority.

Democrats ran for just 75 House seats during the last state election and currently hold 30.

They also hold just ten out of 50 Senate seats.

Party leader Phil Gia Quinta says historically, it's been hard to convince people to run, but this year he's cautiously optimistic.

That's going to give, over 66.

5 million Hoosiers a choice this fall, which, you know, hasn't happened in a very long time.

Conversely, 20 Democratic candidates will run without a Republican challenger, mostly in Indianapolis and Lake County.

The party hasn't won a majority in the state House of representatives since 2008.

Jon, what is the historical significance of this?

Oh, you do have, more opportunities for Hoosier voters to see two names, at least two names on the ballot, which has not happened in in a lot of cases, increasingly because of gerrymandering, we have districts that are either very Republican or very Democratic.

And there is a sense of for realists in the room to look at it and say, I really don't want to spend my money, my time.

I could be home watching the ball game or with my family, a little league practice.

I don't need to go and suffer this indignity only to get trounced on election day.

So kudos to those who want to see, contested races.

I don't know that it's going to change many things because yes, this is the there's a national climate that might benefit, those who are using affordability, as is their mantra.

But, the lines are still the lines.

You remember, redistricting failed here.

It wasn't even state that was congressional.

So I don't want to confuse people by talking about the two, but the lines are still the lines.

And they were dramatically R or dramatically D before.

So I don't think there will be significant change.

But hey, if we could have 100 House races with two candidates, at least in each one, I think that would be a step forward.

And I know you mentioned affordability, Caroline.

I know some of the issues.

I know that's a big reason why we're possibly seeing an increase in Democrats maybe running this, this, this election.

Yeah.

I mean, I think it is definitely a sign that the Democrat Party here at least thinks they have a little bit more energy and a little bit more backing to, their name on the ballot.

and yeah, I think it's a lot of it's coming down to affordability.

Everyone sees their, you know, grocery bills, their gas bills are going up.

Even though Indiana, we have on average some of the lowest gas, here.

But I think overall, you know, you can't ignore the national politics too.

Going on.

People are, you know, pretty upset or they have strong feelings about Trump's involvement in the Iran war.

And so that is all coming into play, I think, into this.

But yeah, I think at the end of the day, though, Indiana voters often, you know, comes down to if they see a deer and are on the ballot.

And so the Democrats are going to try their best in some of these more, you know, toss up areas.

We're seeing that maybe in the northern Indianapolis suburbs.

They're trying their hand there.

I know there's even some Democrat seats, though, that they're also trying to keep a hold of like more northern Indiana parts.

So they're they're, you know, trying their best to keep Ahold of what they have and maybe try to get a little edgewise into a few seats.

I think it's maybe six in the house that they're really wanting to try to go after to break up the super majority in the House.

so yeah, we'll see if they have any luck and maybe just even seeing a little percentage here or there over the years can then draw up to an accumulation over the next years.

And when we have a presidential election, when we see more voter turnout, and that's when they could really play their hand.

So this could be them playing the long game, really, of trying to get influence in the state.

And it is all gas prices right now are in part to Governor Braun waving that gas sales tax.

And so I you know Karen you point out the big goal here just breaking a supermajority once you do you think it's possible.

I'm glad Caroline brought up the northern Indiana Indianapolis suburbs because there's a race up there.

Tiffany Stoner is taking Becky Cash on.

And this was the race that had only 64 votes between them last round.

Glasgow.

and this is going to be a really critical race for, for House Democrats.

I know that, many are different.

as you mentioned, there are some defense races as well, but I think larger the larger picture, though, the the good governance side of me always says, you know, when folks have the data shows us that when folks have a choice at the ballot box, there are more people who turn out turnout numbers increase.

You have that excitement.

You have, an ability to finally insert some well, frankly, some some adrenaline in these races when sometimes it's just kind of crickets when at the ballot box in some of these races.

So, I mean, this is great news.

Obviously the Democrats are they got their their stuff together to get this many candidates on the ballot.

but I really think that we need to move forward and have this this needs to be the new standard.

I know there's still some time to for party chairs, to appoint some people for some of these races.

So this could change a little bit for some of those that aren't running right now.

Opposed.

But do you see any Republicans possibly vulnerable to to elections in this general election, November?

I mean, I think that there may be some close races, but no, I don't see any of them being vulnerable.

And if we are giving participation in points and trophies to the Democrats for actually just having people wanting to associate with their party in Indiana and wanting to be leaders, then they would definitely win this round.

But in the grand scheme, you can't really run on affordability.

When then in Indianapolis, the super majority Democratic Council is raising will taxes.

That would spill under a Republican supermajority.

And that was a bipartisan effort.

It was.

But on the city council, the super majority voted against to have some Republicans join that.

Reclaiming my time, reclaiming my time on this topic.

When you have the Democratic mayor of Indianapolis, the three time Democratic mayor of Indianapolis, pushing against increasing taxes, pushing against the super majority Democratic Party, saying that we need to charge our residents more.

I think that you can see the difference in messaging.

So are they running on affordability while simultaneously increasing taxes in one of the most Democratic cities in the state?

I don't know, I think that there's intention versus execution.

I think if the intention is to just put people on the ballot, this may be the bow by effect, to put people on the ballot in hopes that maybe they win when the numbers aren't there, and then the platform no longer really aligns with what you're really doing, then I think that they will get an A for that.

I think this election, we're going to see a lot of conversations about affordability in the policies and what they really do and how they are affecting Hoosiers in the state.

And so just when we get to our last topic here, Indiana childcare providers are pushing back against new state changes that would lessen education requirements for childcare workers.

Caroline Beck has more.

Indiana wants to reduce certain education requirements for childcare center directors and caregivers, all in an effort to boost affordability.

But during a Monday morning public comment session on these rule changes, dozens of providers argued it risks only weakening an already struggling workforce.

Felicia marble owns her own childcare business in Indianapolis and said the changes feel insulting.

Many of us have invested years into formal training certificates, credentials and degrees because this is a career that demands professionalism.

Expertise.

During most critical years of child development.

The Indiana Family and Social Services Administration could make changes to the proposal before final adoption.

Caroline, you reported on this.

Why is the state doing this?

Yeah, the state's doing this because, in the over past two years, the child care sector in Indiana has really been in a crisis mode.

A lot of that stemming from our cut in funding to ccdf vouchers that help low income families get that money to pay for child care.

So without that money, we are seeing loss of seats in childcare businesses.

They're having to let go staff, maybe even close their businesses.

Families go without care.

And so by lessening these requirements, they're hoping to probably boost the workforce in childcare issues.

But we heard from a lot of the providers or at the lot of caretakers who testified saying that it's not the fact of getting these jobs, it's the actual sustainability and, you know, support they get while doing the job.

So they get a lot of low pay historically, lots of high turnover in these jobs.

And so that just doesn't produce, you know, a lot of stability for this.

So we heard a lot of people say if you want to fix this issue, you need to provide the funding for it.

And through that ccdf funding, I think is going to be really vital in the next year or so.

And we have about 90s left.

So, Lindsay, you know, and I'll give you both a chance to talk about this a little bit.

But, you.

Know, we all agree there needs to be, you know, action on on the legislative side of things.

And we've talked about this before.

this has been a real big issue for for our family personally because our child care, was looking at facing, closing a closure, a potential closure.

Thankfully, they didn't have to do that.

But, yeah, it's the jobs being lost in this sector are just inserting so much, inserting so much uncertainty into family lives.

It's just it's got to have effects.

And I guess, you know, I know since the state has pushed for equality, you know, where's the feeling when we're seeing the state.

Like pulling back on some of these, I guess, restrictions maybe that we're pushing for some of that quality?

I think that you are able to reduce regulation and still have quality, but this is really just a symptom of a of a larger problem.

And the root is that we need access to child care in order for the economic development and workforce development to continue to thrive in this state.

And that's what we need to fix.

Underneath, I have.

To say, lowering standards is great, makes sense, saves money until something happens.

And then we have the headline story about a child that dies or is injured because somebody who didn't either the numbers, the in terms of the caregiver ratio, which has been changed in over the years, was different, or somebody who didn't have the proper training and skills came in, then all of a sudden what was a good idea before all of a sudden everybody says, oh, that was his idea, and they point at somebody else.

Caroline, I know we'll look forward to some of your reporting on this in the future.

Well, that's Indiana Week in Review for this week.

Our panel has been political strategist Lindsay Haake, Republican Whitley Yates, Jon Schwantes, host of Indiana lawmakers.

And Caroline Beck, government reporter at WFYI.

You can find Indiana Week in reviews, podcast and episodes@WFYI.org.

Slash, highwire or on the PBS app.

I'm Samantha Horton, WFYI reporter and newscaster.

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

The 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 ParrRichey.