Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
Curtis Hill, the former Indiana attorney general mounting a comeback run for governor, said he would eliminate all state-funded programs that “exist only to pander to identity politics”—including the Indiana Office of Equity, Inclusion and Opportunity—if elected to the state’s highest office in 2024.
“Unnecessary government offices that exist only to pander to identity politics agendas and that do not lead to tangible positive outcomes are a drain on Hoosiers and need to be ended,” Hill said in written remarks released Monday.
Hill also promised to hold “bridge forums” to encourage “open civil discourse with a solutions-oriented focus.”
“We need unity and not division through the advancement of true equal opportunity through bold leadership,” he added.
Hill’s statement did not specifically address if he will target diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives at state colleges and universities, as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis did when he signed a law earlier this year banning the state’s public colleges and universities from spending money on DEI programs.
However, a press release from Hill’s campaign said he would work to achieve solutions in areas such as education, criminal justice, equal opportunity, mental health, and race relations through conservative policies that benefit people of every race and background.
Hill’s promise to eliminate the state’s equity and inclusion office appears to be a direct rebuke of GOP Gov. Eric Holcomb, who created the office and came out in support of such efforts following protests over George Floyd’s death at the hands of a Minneapolis police officer.
“All Hoosier citizens should know that peacefully protesting and demonstrating for this cause is a noble one, rightly protected by the First Amendment,” Holcomb said in June 2020. “In fact, I hope the peacemakers continue to express themselves and not allow the message to be overwhelmed by the troublemakers seeking to administer pain on the innocent.”
Two months later, Holcomb created a new cabinet-level position “focused solely on improving equity, inclusion and opportunity” across state agencies, appointing Karrah Herring, former director of public affairs at the University of Notre Dame, as the state’s first Chief Equity, Inclusion and Opportunity Officer.
Hill’s entry into the governor’s race earlier this month made it a four-way contest for the Republican nomination, with U.S. Sen. Mike Braun, Lt. Gov. Suzanne Crouch, and Fort Wayne businessman Eric Doden having already raised millions toward their election bids. Secretary of Commerce Brad Chambers has also said he’s considering entering the race. Holcomb is prevented by law from seeking a third consecutive term as governor.
Hill, a former Elkhart County prosecutor, was elected attorney general in 2016 and once seen as a rising star in Hoosier politics, but his tenure was tainted by accusations that he inappropriately touched four women at a party in 2018. He remained in office through the end of his term, even amid calls by Gov. Holcomb for his resignation and after the Indiana Supreme Court found the women’s allegations to be credible and suspended Hill’s law license for 30 days.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
Hill is right and his comments on this issue make common sense but he has very little chance of being elected.
Not good look….but, I’m guessing he has almost no chance to get elected so….no harm, no foul.
The man groped women in a public venue. Not leadership material.
Rick S. +1
Actually boys, Curtis has a good chance. This announcement probably helps. So far he’s the first candidate to even propose a measure he would take if elected, the others all seem to want an extended version of Holcomb and Pence. Remember, Curtis Hill got more votes in 2016 than any other state wide office seeker, and even Trump. He can pull democrats where others can’t. Now if he would just open up and change his stance on marijuana legalization, he could be a shoe in!
He will pull very few Ds. He’s lived a little since his last election. As in: been the subject of a very public sexual harassment action.
Zoeller in his last AG election also got the “most votes in IN history”. I think that says more about the office than the person. When people get to these virtually unknown state-wide offices like AG, Auditor, etc… they default to their base political identity. In contrast elections for US Senate and Gov in Indiana some are willing to choose the “other” party depending on a variety of factors. Mitch Daniels won re-election in the same year Obama won in 2008, including Marion County. Meaning more than a few Republicans voted for Obama and more than a few Dems voted for Mitch.
Another man who says “I can do it the right way because I know what’s right, I don’t need a committee to tell me how to fix these issues” while having a history of very clearly not doing the right things or knowing what’s right.
The groping, in my opinion, eliminates him…regardless of his platform. Not acceptable in any way, shape or form.
Currently, groping, sniffing and gnawing is Presidential.
As reported on WTHR: Author: The Associated Press
Published: 3:09 PM EDT October 22, 2018
Updated: 5:56 AM EDT October 25, 2018
Although the suspected behavior and comments may be disturbing, rude, and inappropriate, “Did a crime occur and could it be proven?” Special Prosecutor Dan Sigler told reporters. “I decided there is no crime that could be proven.”
Sigler said while the accusations were credible, he could not reach a burden of proof. Sigler said there was “insufficient evidence of Hill’s intent to touch the victims in a rude, insolent or angry manner to constitute a battery, and a lack of evidence of force with respect to the statutory requirements of sexual battery.”
Sigler said he could not see the benefit to the people of Indiana in moving forward with prosecution since his findings did not show elements needed to support a battery or sexual battery conviction. Additionally, he said his job is not to determine whether Hill acted inappropriately, but if criminal acts took place.