.png)
Healthcare
3.67
Economics
4.00
Candidate Name
Julie McGill
District
State Senate District 15
Values
Grade
Values
Party
Democrat
Experience
Challenger
Grade
Democracy
3.33
Accessibility
4
Governance
4
Cost
Choice
4
3
Freedom
Voting
3
3
Community
2
B
Overall Grade
Education
2.67
Affordability
Equity
Opportunity
4
4
4
Environment
Public Safety
Inclusion
X
2
2
Stability
Funding
Belonging
3
2
3
Notable Information
Candidate Name
Candidate for:
State Senate District 15
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)
The OBBBA's projected Medicaid cuts threaten to deepen Indiana's healthcare challenges over the next decade. But the crisis many Hoosiers face today isn't just about coming federal changes. It's the result of state-level choices.
After FSSA's $1 billion budgeting error in 2023, the state cut services, created barriers for providers, and let waiting lists grow to more than 19,000 elderly and disabled Hoosiers. These are our parents, grandparents, and neighbors, and some are dying before care ever arrives.
If elected, I'll focus on preserving coverage, protecting providers, and maximizing every federal healthcare dollar available to Hoosiers. That means:
Modernizing eligibility by using existing employment, SNAP, and wage data before demanding more paperwork.
Simplifying renewals with pre-populated forms and outreach to vulnerable populations.
Cutting administrative barriers that cause eligible people to lose coverage.
Strengthening oversight of healthcare consolidation to lower costs.
Indiana is moving the opposite direction. Federal work requirements don't take effect until January 2027, yet the state has already chosen the most restrictive options available, including maximum three-month verification periods and quarterly reviews. These choices virtually guarantee that eligible Hoosiers lose coverage to red tape rather than true ineligibility.
To administer these rules, Indiana is hiring roughly 400 employees, with taxpayers funding about half their salaries. Meanwhile, for this exact population, the federal government pays $9 for every $1 the state contributes. Those dollars sustain our hospitals, nursing homes, home-care providers, and thousands of Hoosier jobs. We're spending taxpayer money to grow bureaucracy while risking the federal funding that keeps people healthy.
And if fraud prevention is the real goal, the state should pursue the $700 million in alleged overpayments to managed care organizations and hospitals with the same determination it showed chasing $198 million from providers over clerical errors. Government should meet the standard it demands of families.
Indiana can't afford more bureaucracy and less healthcare. We need policies that lower costs, expand access, and keep Hoosiers healthy.
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)
If a company worth hundreds of billions of dollars wants to do business in Indiana, that's great. But before we hand out tax breaks, taxpayers deserve to know exactly what they're getting in return and who will be held accountable if those promises aren't kept.
Economic development should make life better for the people who already live here. It should create good-paying jobs, strengthen local communities, and grow our economy. It should not become a system where taxpayers subsidize some of the wealthiest corporations in the world while local residents are left to bear the risks and costs.
Indiana needs more transparency and accountability. Companies seeking major incentives should be required to disclose ownership, projected resource demands, expected economic benefits, and any public subsidies they receive. Significant changes to approved projects should trigger new public review rather than being approved behind closed doors.
There are real concerns about what these facilities will demand of our water resources, wetlands, air quality, energy supply, utility rates, and local infrastructure — and the people who will live with the consequences deserve a meaningful voice, not a rubber stamp. I support stronger environmental oversight, independent impact studies, and keeping siting decisions with local communities rather than overriding them at the Statehouse.
Above all, homeowners and small businesses should not be left paying higher utility bills to power corporate growth. Data centers should cover the full cost of the electricity and infrastructure they require, so those costs aren't shifted onto Hoosier families.
Indiana should welcome investment, but the deal has to work for Hoosiers too. No project should move forward by pushing its costs, risks, or long-term burdens onto local communities. And given how fast this is moving, I believe Indiana should slow down long enough to get the rules right before locking in 50-year tax deals we don't yet fully understand.
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 a parent's right to choose the school that works best for their child, but I cannot support Indiana's voucher system in its current form.
What began as a targeted program to help lower-income families access educational opportunities has expanded into a universal subsidy available regardless of income. Starting July 1, 2026, all income limits are removed, meaning taxpayers will help cover private school tuition even for families who were already choosing private education. At the same time, public schools continue to educate the vast majority of Hoosier students and are required to serve every child who walks through their doors.
This is not just an education issue. It is also a taxpayer and property tax issue. When state funding is diverted away while public schools still face the same fixed costs, local communities are often asked to make up the difference through property tax referendums.
Parents should have educational options, but taxpayer funding should come with accountability. Any school receiving public dollars should meet comparable standards for transparency, financial reporting, student outcomes, and student access. Public funds should be used to educate students, not generate private profit.
I would support high-quality public and nonprofit charter schools that expand opportunities for students, but I believe Indiana should prioritize adequately funding public schools before expanding taxpayer subsidies for private school tuition.
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?
In my opinion, the greatest threat to our democracy is the erosion of public trust and the growing belief that everyday people no longer have a meaningful voice in government.
Hoosiers know that important decisions are being made behind closed doors. They see powerful interests outweigh ordinary citizens, and they watch legislation move so quickly that meaningful public review can be difficult. Additionally, the rapid spread of misinformation makes it harder to find trustworthy facts and make informed decisions. When citizens lose faith in their government, or in the information they depend on, participation declines and democracy itself grows weaker.
If elected, I will work to rebuild that trust through transparency, accountability, and civic engagement.
Government should be easy for citizens to see into and understand. Hoosiers deserve to know how their tax dollars are spent, who is influencing public policy, and whether their elected officials are keeping their promises. I support stronger transparency laws, greater accountability for public agencies and subsidy recipients, and policies that ensure major decisions are made in the open.
Rebuilding trust also requires giving people a stronger voice in the democratic process. Citizens are more likely to participate when they believe their involvement matters. That means expanding opportunities for public input, investing in civic education, and finding new ways to encourage meaningful civic engagement so that more Hoosiers feel connected to the decisions that affect their lives.
Another challenge is helping citizens navigate today's information environment. The flood of misinformation makes it harder than ever to identify trustworthy information. I support media literacy and critical thinking education that teaches students how to evaluate sources, verify claims, distinguish fact from opinion, and make informed decisions.
By making government more transparent, encouraging greater civic participation, and helping citizens navigate an increasingly complex information environment, we can strengthen public trust and build a government that works for all Hoosiers.
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. State and local governments should focus on public safety, enforcing state laws, and cooperating with federal authorities when serious criminal activity is involved.
I do not believe local police should be required to function as federal immigration agents, but I do support cooperation that protects public safety and upholds the rule of law. Effective policing depends on trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve. People should feel safe reporting crimes, cooperating with investigations, and seeking help when they need it without fear that routine interactions with local police will turn into immigration enforcement actions.
Indiana's role is to ensure our communities are safe, our laws are followed, and our resources are used effectively, all while maintaining the public trust essential to keeping our neighborhoods secure.