.png)
Healthcare
4.00
Economics
3.67
Candidate Name
Misti Meehan
District
State House District 84
Values
Grade
Values
Party
Democrat
Experience
Challenger
Grade
Democracy
3.67
Accessibility
4
Governance
4
Cost
Choice
4
4
Freedom
Voting
3
4
Community
3.00
A-
Overall Grade
Education
3.67
Affordability
Equity
Opportunity
4
4
3
Environment
Public Safety
Inclusion
3
3
3
Stability
Funding
Belonging
4
4
3
Notable Information
Candidate Name
Candidate for:
State House District 84
Democrat
Challenger
Notable Information
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)
Healthcare is not optional. If people cannot afford to see a doctor, fill a prescription, give birth safely, or keep a hospital open in their community, then Indiana is failing at a basic responsibility.
The projected Medicaid cuts would hit Indiana hard. The Indiana Hospital Association estimates Indiana could lose $31 billion in Medicaid funding over the next decade, including almost $13 billion in hospital funding, and approximately 180,000 Hoosiers could lose Medicaid coverage. Those cuts will not only affect Medicaid recipients. They will mean more uncompensated care, longer wait times, reduced services, and possible closures, especially in rural and underserved areas.
If elected, I would support state budget action to protect Medicaid access and stabilize critical hospital funding, especially for emergency care, maternity care, mental health care, and rural hospitals. I would also oppose spending taxpayer dollars on unnecessary bureaucracy designed to remove eligible Hoosiers from coverage. Fraud should be addressed, but we should not balance the budget by making it harder for working families, seniors, people with disabilities, and children to get care.
I would also support stronger accountability for hospitals, insurance companies, and large health care networks. If the state is investing public dollars, Hoosiers deserve transparency on pricing, billing, charity care, executive compensation, and how those dollars are being used.
Finally, I would support legislation protecting Hoosiers from losing their homes or having wages excessively garnished because they got sick. Medical debt should not become a life sentence. Indiana should cap abusive collections, require reasonable payment plans, and prohibit medical debt from being used to take someone’s primary residence.
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 put the brakes on large AI data center projects until strong safeguards are in place. I would support a statewide moratorium on new AI data centers while Indiana studies the long-term impact on water, electricity rates, farmland, local infrastructure, and surrounding neighborhoods.
These are not ordinary economic development projects. AI data centers can require enormous amounts of electricity and water, and the costs should not be pushed onto Hoosier families through higher utility bills. Before any project is approved, Indiana should require full transparency about water usage, energy demand, backup power, noise, emissions, local tax incentives, and who will pay for needed grid upgrades.
I also oppose secretive deals and nondisclosure agreements that keep communities in the dark. Local residents deserve to know what is being proposed before decisions are made, not after. If a company wants public incentives, access to public utilities, or support from local government, then the public deserves enforceable commitments in return.
Indiana also needs to protect water as a public resource. Even closed-loop systems can still have environmental impacts, and communities should not be asked to take a company’s word for it. Data centers should be required to provide independent environmental review, water-use reporting, heat and discharge plans, and proof that local water supplies will not be harmed.
I am not opposed to technology or economic development. I am opposed to rushing into billion-dollar industrial projects while leaving communities, ratepayers, and natural resources unprotected. Indiana should end unnecessary subsidies, require transparency, protect Hoosier electric bills, preserve local control, and approve only projects that can prove they will not harm the people who live here.
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 oppose the use of taxpayer dollars for private school vouchers.
Public money should fund public schools. Indiana has a constitutional responsibility to provide a system of public schools that is free and open to all children. Our public schools serve every student who walks through the door, including students with disabilities, students who need transportation, students learning English, students from low-income families, and students who need additional support.
Private schools are not held to the same standards. They can limit enrollment, set their own admission policies, and many are religious institutions. I respect the right of families to choose private or religious education for their children, but I do not believe taxpayers should be required to subsidize that choice, especially while public schools are still underfunded.
Since 2012, Indiana has spent billions of taxpayer dollars on charter schools and private school vouchers. At the same time, public schools are being asked to do more with less. Teachers are leaving the profession, support staff are stretched thin, and too many schools lack the resources they need for smaller class sizes, counselors, special education, transportation, and career and technical programs.
If elected, I would oppose further expansion of vouchers and support redirecting education dollars back to the public schools that serve all Hoosier children. I would also support stronger accountability and transparency for any school receiving taxpayer funds. Hoosier taxpayers deserve to know where their money is going, and Hoosier students deserve fully funded public 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?
The biggest threat facing our democracy right now is the loss of trust in fair, secure, and accessible elections.
As a Allen County Election Board worker, I know how much work goes into running elections correctly. I also know that Indiana needs stronger consistency across all 92 counties. Voters should not have a different experience depending on where they live, and counties should not be operating under uneven standards for how elections are administered, how results are collected, and how results are reported.
Election security must be taken seriously. That includes protecting our election systems from foreign cyber threats, requiring strong cybersecurity standards, maintaining secure voting equipment, using voter-verifiable paper records, conducting proper audits, and making sure local election officials have the training and resources they need.
At the same time, election security should never be used as an excuse for voter suppression. We can protect elections and protect access to the ballot at the same time. That means clear rules, transparent reporting, consistent training, enough voting locations, reasonable early voting access, and accountability from the Secretary of State’s office regardless of who holds that position.
If elected, I would support legislation requiring stronger statewide election-administration standards, transparent reporting procedures, cybersecurity support for counties, post-election audits, and voter-verifiable paper records. I would also oppose unnecessary barriers that make it harder for eligible Hoosiers to vote.
Democracy works when voters believe the process is fair, secure, and open to them. Indiana should be leading on that—not leaving 92 counties to figure it out 92 different ways.
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 primarily a federal responsibility. Local and state governments should not be turned into federal immigration agencies, and local police should not be asked to do ICE’s job.
I believe in the Constitution, and due process applies to every person in this country, not only citizens. If someone commits a violent crime, that should be handled through the legal system. But we cannot trample constitutional rights, ignore due process, or treat entire communities as suspects.
State and local government have a responsibility to protect public safety, uphold the law, and preserve trust between residents and law enforcement. When local police are pushed into immigration enforcement, it can make communities less safe because victims and witnesses may become afraid to report crimes, cooperate with investigations, or seek help.
Indiana should not spend state or local resources helping carry out mass detention or deportation efforts that violate due process. I oppose using Indiana facilities, including military or correctional facilities, for large-scale immigration detention without transparency, oversight, legal access, and clear accountability. Federal officials confirmed in 2025 that Camp Atterbury was being made available for temporary immigrant detention, and Hoosiers deserve to know exactly what is being done in our name and with our resources.
If elected, I would oppose state laws that force local governments and police departments to participate in federal immigration enforcement beyond what is legally required. I would support clear limits on state and local involvement, transparency for any detention facilities operating in Indiana, access to legal counsel, humane conditions, and accountability for any agency that violates the law.
“Follow the law” has to apply to everyone, including federal officials, state government, and local law enforcement.