Q&A with State Rep. 63 candidates Teresa Kendall and Shane Lindauer

The Indiana House of Representatives is the lower house of the Indiana General Assembly.

Elected members serve two-year terms without term limits. District 63 now includes Bainbridge, Boone, Patoka, Harbison, Madison and Marion townships in Dubois County and parts of Pike, Daviess, and Martin counties. State representatives are elected every two years.

Incumbent Shane Lindauer (Rep) has served as the District 63 representative since 2017, when he was appointed by caucus to finish State Representative Mike Braun’s term when he ran for U.S. Senate. He operates Bee Hive Assisted Living in Huntingburg with his wife.

Teresa Kendall (Dem) has opposed Lindauer in the previous election and serves as the head of the Dubois County Democratic Party.

Here are the questions. (All answers are as written by the candidates with light editing for grammar and layout.)

What issue or issues that will impact Dubois County are the biggest priority for you? 

Lindauer — As a representative of House District 63, which includes part of 4 counties, I need to be mindful of and responsive to everyone in the district. A few of the issues that I am contacted about on a regular basis and can have an impact on are burdensome regulations on businesses (including the farming community), abortion, parental rights and school choice in education. I will continue to make these a priority for the district I serve.

Kendall — The Mid-States Corridor, also known as “The Road,” and Funding Public Education are two issues that are a top priority for me and all of Dubois County. The Mid-States Corridor is a project created by the Regional Development Authority that allows private money to be used to initiate infrastructure projects that will be paid for with State funds. This Private Public Partnership allows any wealthy person or group to pay the state to build roads for their personal benefit and leaves the public out of the decision-making. The Mid-States Corridor is a waste of tax dollars when we can improve the roads we have. The Road will take homes, farms, and businesses; raise property taxes and saddle us with debt for decades. Not only do we not need this road, but an overwhelming amount of Dubois County residents do not want the road.

Our Public schools are the most important investment we make with our tax dollars. In school funding, the Education Budget passed by our state legislators takes school funds away from our local public schools to pay for private schools in places like Indianapolis and Lake County. This forces us to have referendums to raise taxes. In both cases, the voters of Dubois County had no say or vote for The Road or in the decision to take tax dollars away from our schools.

We need to have Legislators that will use our tax dollars wisely and to the benefit of their constituents. Right now, the State has a surplus of six billion dollars, but parents of public school children had to pay hundreds of dollars for book rental and curriculum materials. Teachers are paid some of the lowest salaries in the country and we are in desperate need of new teachers and support staff. Roads and other infrastructure are getting attention, but that is due to the federal money allotted to Indiana at the end of the last budget session in 2021. I am sure that voters would like to have a voice in how that budget surplus is used.

The process in both issues is not how our State Government should operate. Many people feel they have no say in these decisions to have their land taken by the State or to have our tax dollars taken from our local schools. As a State Representative for Dubois County, I would create legislation that would require more public input, such as a referendum, before the State can take land or any private property, farms, or businesses. For school funding, we must change the law that allows the State to take our local schools’ funds without letting us have a say in the decision.

To add to that, what piece of legislation are you making a priority that could impact Dubois County? 

Kendall — Legislation allowing us to have a referendum on raising taxes for infrastructure or use of school funds would be a focus for my work in the Legislature. In recent years, the State Legislature has promoted too many Private/Public partnerships that are nothing more than letting private entities have access to public funds without permission from the voters. We already allow referendums to raise taxes to fund municipalities or schools, we should be able to do the same for our own property.

Lindauer — I am currently researching and studying a variety of pieces of legislation relating to the issues above, as well as other issues not listed. As the session draws closer, the decision of which legislation I file will be determined.  

How do you gauge your constituents’ concerns?

Lindauer — Regarding constituent concerns, I try to be as available as possible to those with questions or concerns.  I do my best to respond personally to contacts I receive through emails, calls or messages via social media.  Also, there are many opportunities to participate in various community events, which allow me to meet and talk with constituents.  In my time serving District 63, several pieces of legislation on which I have worked (or am working), have come directly from conversations with constituents.  

Kendall — The only way to gauge the concerns of the people of the District is to listen to what they have to say. To accomplish that, the Representative must be present in all parts of the District. As the Representative for District 63, I will hold monthly constituent meetings in each county; I will have forums during the legislative session, after the session and throughout the year where constituents can ask questions, and we can have a public discussion. I would never have any public meeting where constituents were not allowed to ask questions of me directly. Elected officials should do all they can to communicate with voters and allow them to feel like they are a part of the legislative process.

In light of the interest in election security, what, if any, concerns do you have about the electoral process in Indiana? 

Kendall — I have no concerns about the electoral process in Indiana. I have worked at the polls in Marion and Vigo Counties when I lived in those places. I have also worked early voting polls in 2018 in Dubois County. County clerks in each of those locations, as well as all county clerks in Indiana, take their job of administering elections seriously, and I have no doubts about the security of the election this year and for years to come.

Lindauer — I think a big part of election security is simply making certain that the current process is meticulously followed. Namely, a voter must meet the state’s residency requirements and register with the state.  Going hand in hand with this is having effective and thorough ways to validate the legal identification of individuals as they register and vote.

What are your concerns regarding bipartisanship in the state house? How do you find political commonality in this current divisive culture?

Lindauer — One of the biggest and most pleasant surprises upon my entry into the legislature was learning that the vast majority of bills are passed with strong bipartisan support. In fact, it is not at all uncommon for Republican authors of bills to ask a Democrat if he/she would like to be added to a bill as a co-author.  This is not to say that there aren’t issues on which there is strong disagreement.  However, for the most part, as long as we can see each other as people trying to do the best we can for our constituents and not as enemies, the disagreement and debate that exists is part of a healthy process.

Kendall — Bipartisanship does exist in our State Legislature, just not often enough. The Leadership of the House and Senate set the tone for the culture that exists during the session, and it is the responsibility of the Legislators to maintain a culture of comity and respect for their fellow lawmakers and the institution of the State Legislature. Maintaining a respectful relationship with others that have differing political goals requires negotiation to find common ground that we can all stand on. When it comes to making legislation for the State, we must have input from both parties, so I will collaborate with any other legislator that wants to solve problems and create opportunities for the benefit of all our constituents. If I am elected, I understand that my job is to represent all the people of Daviess, Dubois, Martin, and Pike Counties, not a political ideology.

What are your concerns for the future of Indiana, and how can the state legislature help mitigate those concerns?

Kendall — Indiana must invest in the people of this state, providing the quality of life that keeps people here and attracts new residents. The state legislature can create legislation and direct agencies to facilitate that investment that must include: • Opportunities for housing – home ownership and affordable rentals. The Indiana Housing Authority should be made more accessible to every county to help solve our housing problems. • Adequate funding for Public Education – Our teachers and support staff need to have better pay to keep the teachers we have and attract new teachers. Include preschool and childcare programs as part of Education funding. • Improve access to Healthcare – Indiana has many counties that have no hospitals or doctors. Our focus should be on healthcare for women and children due to the high infant and maternal mortality rate in the State. • Allow residents of Indiana that have work visas to obtain driving cards and have access to in-state tuition rates for state colleges to keep these valuable future citizens as part of our state economy.

Lindauer — My biggest concern for Indiana is making certain that we ensure a culture that fosters personal responsibility and accountability while also maintaining a climate of limited government and local control whenever possible. Future legislatures should strongly consider these attributes when the policy is being crafted.

What are your thoughts on the state legalizing marijuana? If not completely, then what about for medical use?

Lindauer — While I don’t support legalizing the recreational use of marijuana, I 100% support legalization for medical use and have coauthored legislation to do so.  I also believe that there could be great value in hemp-related products which would be available with a measured, limited level of legalization.

Kendall — The use of marijuana, or cannabis, should be legal in Indiana. Indiana is a moderate state, so medical marijuana may be the way to start to see the benefits of making it legal. I would support a medical cannabis law that would become full use after a defined period of time. Cannabis has benefits for medical conditions that have been validated by research. Cancer patients, Veterans with service-related medical conditions, stroke victims and many chronic medical issues would benefit from the legal use of cannabis. Legal marijuana would add to our tax revenue and we could regulate its use, much like alcohol. . There have been over 30 Legislators that have filed bills to legalize cannabis, but the Leadership will not allow it to move forward. It is time that Indiana recognizes cannabis as a substance that can provide benefits to our citizens and the State.

Would you support an Indiana Constitutional amendment to allow ballot measures by Indiana voters?

Kendall — I take amending the State Constitution very seriously, so allowing ballot measures should have some limits, we would not want every issue to be on a ballot. I would support referendums for the taking of land, farms, or business for state use. Raising property taxes should be up for a vote also. Major changes in laws could be settled by a ballot measure, and the public would feel like they had a voice in making the change and were a part of the legislative process. I would gladly support a ballot measure for legalizing cannabis in 2024.

Lindauer — Indiana has an amendment process already allowed for in our State’s Constitution (Article 16). I believe that this process is suitable for our system of government and therefore am not in favor of making a change.