.png)
Healthcare
4.00
Economics
4.00
Candidate Name
Lauren S Cole
District
State House District 37
Values
Grade
Values
Party
Democrat
Experience
Challenger
Grade
Democracy
3.67
Accessibility
4
Governance
4
Cost
Choice
4
4
Freedom
Voting
4
3
Community
4.00
A
Overall Grade
Education
3.67
Affordability
Equity
Opportunity
4
4
4
Environment
Public Safety
Inclusion
4
4
4
Stability
Funding
Belonging
4
3
4
Notable Information
Candidate Name
Candidate for:
State House District 37
Democrat
Challenger
Notable Information
Lauren S Cole's Contact Information
Sources
Reference links
MADVoters Survey Responses
Healthcare: The Big Beautiful Bill is projected to cut $31 billion from Indiana’s Medicaid funding, including almost $13 billion in hospital funding, over the next decade. What will you do if elected to ensure healthcare affordability and access given these changes? (Source: Indiana Hospital Association)
As someone who works in cancer clinical trials, I see every day what happens when people can’t afford care. If Indiana loses billions in Medicaid funding, the answer cannot be to shift more costs onto working families or allow rural hospitals and community providers to struggle. I would fight to protect access to care by prioritizing healthcare funding in the state budget, reducing administrative barriers that prevent eligible Hoosiers from receiving coverage, and investing in preventive care that lowers long-term costs. I also believe we need greater transparency in healthcare pricing and stronger oversight of healthcare consolidation to ensure patients aren’t paying more while receiving fewer choices. Healthcare should not be a luxury. People should not have to choose between seeing a doctor, filling a prescription, or putting food on the table.
Economics: AI and data centers are having a huge impact on jobs and communities across the nation, particularly in Indiana. What is Congress’s role in addressing this developing technology? What action will you take to hear and represent the concerns of Hoosiers on this topic?
Economics: Dozens of AI data centers are planning to come to Indiana, drawn by the state’s “business-friendly” reputation. How should Indiana manage these large industrial site proposals and their potential impact on communities? (Source: Citizens Action Coalition)
Indiana should evaluate data center projects based on their impact on working families and local communities, not simply whether they increase corporate investment. These facilities can place significant demands on our electrical grid, water resources, and local infrastructure while creating relatively few permanent jobs compared to the incentives they often receive. I support requiring comprehensive impact studies, greater local input before approval, and stronger transparency around utility costs and tax incentives. Any public incentives should be tied to measurable benefits for Hoosiers, including infrastructure improvements, protections against higher utility bills, and clear return-on-investment standards with clawback provisions if promised benefits are not delivered. I support a moratorium on the construction of data centers in this state until we have clear answers and regulations in place to protect Hoosiers.
Education: Describe your stance on the Department of Education and its role in education administration, funding, and protections for students with disabilities.
Education: Since 2012, Indiana has spent over $5.5 billion in taxpayer dollars on charter schools and the private school voucher program. If elected, would you support or oppose the use of taxpayer dollars to funding private schools and charter schools? Why or why not? (Source: ICPE)
I support parents having choices for their children’s education, but I do not believe public taxpayer dollars should be used to subsidize private schools that are not held to the same accountability, transparency, and access requirements as public schools. Public schools serve every child who walks through their doors, regardless of income, disability, or background, and they remain the foundation of our communities. Since Indiana has expanded vouchers to families at all income levels, billions of taxpayer dollars have been diverted away from public schools while many districts face budget shortfalls, teacher shortages, and program cuts. I oppose the use of taxpayer dollars funding private and charter schools.
Democracy: In your opinion, what is the biggest challenge or threat facing our democracy right now? If elected, what will you do to help overcome this challenge or threat?
I believe the biggest threat to our democracy is the growing distrust people have in our institutions and in each other. Most Hoosiers feel ignored, unheard, and disconnected from the decisions that affect their lives. When people lose faith that government can solve problems, it becomes easier for division, misinformation, and political extremism to take root, and that is exactly what we are seeing happen. As a state representative, I would work to rebuild trust through transparency, accessibility, and accountability. That means holding regular community meetings, listening to constituents regardless of party affiliation, protecting voting rights, and focusing on solving real problems like affordability, education, healthcare, and infrastructure. Being a representative is a service job to the people, not to corporate interests.
Community: Describe your stance on ICE and its role in immigration enforcement and detention.
Community: What role or responsibility do local and state governments have with regards to immigration enforcement?
Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility, and I oppose efforts to use Indiana tax dollars to expand state involvement in federal immigration raids or detention operations. Government must respect due process, constitutional rights, and human dignity. When families fear interacting with schools, hospitals, or local law enforcement, entire communities become less safe and less healthy.
As a legislator, I would focus on ensuring that Indiana’s resources are invested in the needs of Hoosiers rather than diverting state funds toward federal immigration enforcement.