And here lies a recap of key bills that failed to make it to the finish line
Several House bills await further action in the House chamber on Feb. 17, 2024 before moving forward in the 2025 legislative session. (Whitney Downard/Indiana Capital Chronicle)
It started with more than 1,250 bills. And after last week's chamber-swapping deadline, the Indiana General Assembly is down to about 340 pieces of legislation that can move forward into law.
From birth control and bats to gambling and marijuana, lawmakers will likely have to try again next year on these measures.
Legislation regulating vehicle towing tripped up House Republicans for more than two weeks before it met an early demise.
House Bill 1493 would've forced towing companies to create service rate sheets, display them 'conspicuously' and show them to owners present when their vehicles are being towed.
It also would've required that any property owner's future contract with a towing company contain removal and storage rates alongside other provisions, and mandated that towing companies give vehicles back within 24 hours of getting partial payment. Other pieces would've regulated emergency towing services, created a statewide towing complaint process, and banned overcharging and paid referrals.
The measure made it through committee on a unanimous vote, but languished on the House's daily agenda for eight straight session meetings as House Republican colleagues had filed competing amendments. It wasn't taken up before a critical deadline.
Another take on towing regulations, House Bill 1108, failed to get a committee hearing.
A proposal legalizing online lottery and casino gambling never made it to the House's floor.
Legislative leaders talk post-moratorium gambling expansions, more bills reach halfway point
House Bill 1432 easily advanced from a subject-matter committee last month after three hours of discussion, but wasn't heard by a finance-focused committee before a deadline. House Speaker Todd Huston, R-Fishers, said it was 'pretty tough' to find consensus on the complex legislation.
Advocates argued that Hoosiers are already playing illegal versions of these games, so legalization could benefit Indiana businesses and state coffers. Opponents testified that expanding gambling would increase the likelihood more people get hooked and develop addictions. Some provisions would've established a bulked-up program for responsible gambling and gambling addiction help.
Attempts to designate a state mammal and state fruit also were not, well, fruitful.
Jasper Elementary School students lobbied at the Indiana Statehouse for Republican Rep. Shane Lindauer's House Bill 1618, which would have named the persimmon as Indiana's state fruit.
Fourth-graders said the idea stemmed from a persuasive writing assignment. They emphasized in the House government committee that the sweet, autumnal fruit are native to Indiana, great for cooking and full of health benefits. Lawmakers entertained the discussion but never took a vote on the bill.
Separately, House Bill 1237, offered by Rep. Victoria Garcia Wilburn, D-Fishers, sought to make Myotis sodalis, also known as the Indiana bat, the official mammal of the Hoosier State. The proposal never received a committee hearing, effectively killing it, too.
A repeat attempt to require video surveillance of special education classrooms failed to pass in the first half of session following pushback from schools and teachers.
House Bill 1285 was the second such attempt by Rep. Beck Cash, R-Zionsville, to mandate round-the-clock electronic recording equipment in special education classrooms, sensory rooms, seclusion spaces and time-out areas.
Parents said the move would help protect kids and keep them informed of behavioral incidents.
District administrators weren't opposed, but only if the state helped pay for cameras and other related expenses. Educators, however, were less receptive and maintained that increased staff training — not micromanagement — will better ensure student safety.
Lawmakers in the House Education Committee ultimately nixed the video-recording language. What's left in the bill sent to the Senate is a provision to allow parents an opportunity to collect their student's property if the child no longer attends the school, and another to permit parents to record meetings concerning their child's individualized education program.
An attempt to expand access to birth control for poor Hoosiers failed after a battle over the definition of birth control.
House Bill 1169 started as a simple attempt to establish a fund to provide free birth control to Indiana residents who are eligible for Medicaid. Roughly half of all the births in the state have been paid for by Medicaid since 2017.
But a Republican amendment in committee removed IUDs and condoms from the definition of birth control and added information on 'fertility awareness based methods' like menstrual cycle tracking, also known as the rhythm method.
The bill passed the House Public Health Committee but didn't receive a hearing in the Ways and Means Committee, which focused on financial ramifications of a bill. It is unlikely the language will return given the state's tight budget situation.
Lawmakers scrapped a push to relocate the license for a poor-performing casino early in the session.
Full House Resorts has said revenues at Rising Star Casino Resort have plummeted as Ohio and Kentucky relax their gambling laws. Key lawmakers expressed interest in a move over the interim — including the bill's eventual slayer.
Public Policy Committee Chair Sen. Ron Alting, R-Lafayette, pulled the proposal after listening to about 20 opponents, telling the Indiana Capital Chronicle he didn't plan to allow a vote. Anti-relocation witnesses feared gambling addictions and other risks to their small community's family values.
CONTACT US
True to his word, neither Senate Bill 293 nor the language it contained went any further.
But legislation to 'identify the top three regions in the state' for a license relocation is moving. Senate Bill 43 would require regulators to present their findings to the State Budget Committee by October.
The last time Indiana moved a casino license, a former lawmaker ended up behind bars for his role in an attempted quid pro quo.
Every bill carrying 'marijuana' in its title died by session's halfway point – even a trio intended to ban marijuana-related advertisements within Indiana.
Measures establishing medical marijuana programs — one led by a House Republican, the other by a Senate Democrat — didn't get committee hearings and died. Neither did House Bill 1145, which would've decriminalized possession of two ounces or less of marijuana.
Indiana has long resisted any attempts to loosen laws on the drug, with Republican legislative leaders in December expressing concern about addiction, crime and more.
Overwhelming opposition from county officials additionally killed a Republican bill that would have shifted authority over large-scale utility infrastructure projects from local governments to the state.
Of greatest concern to House Bill 1628's opponents were provisions to strip local governments of their ability to approve or deny construction of power plants, water systems, gas pipelines and transmission that span across multiple counties — instead giving the state more decision-making control over the zoning and approval processes for those proposals.
Bill author Rep. Ed Soliday, R-Valparaiso, called it a response to ongoing resistance of local governments to greenlight solar, wind and other renewables projects that are increasingly necessary to support the state's growing energy demands.
Equally important, he contended, is a transition from coal to more reliable and cost effective power sources that can sustain the influx of data centers and other economic development endeavors ventures coming to Indiana.
Critics, however, decried the proposal as 'overreach,' and argued that it unfairly — maybe even 'unconstitutionally' — weakens local dominion.
The bill received multiple hours of discussion in the House utilities committee, but it was never put to a vote and failed to advance to the full chamber.
A Republican-authored bill to abolish the death penalty in Indiana also died after not getting a committee hearing.
Rep. Bob Morris, R-Fort Wayne, shared intentions earlier this month to scale back his House Bill 1030 to address the efficacy of execution drugs before they can be used, and to alter rules around who can administer life-ending drugs and witness executions.
Death row inmate Joseph Corcoran executed for quadruple murder
Ideas to narrow the proposal — and give it a better chance at advancing through the legislative process — were unsuccessful, though. Despite bipartisan support, Rep. Wendy McNamara, R-Evansville, did not put the bill on her committee's agenda.
Republican House Speaker Todd Huston, of Fishers, said 'he would not anticipate' a death penalty bill to move in the 2025 session. Senate Pro Tem Rodric Bray, R-Martinsville, called Morris' bill 'interesting,' but said his caucus had not discussed the issue.
Morris can still try to find a home for language but no similar vehicles are moving.
Lawmakers have passed numerous bills aimed at controlling health care costs but one died under its own weight.
House Bill 1502 would have limited how much the state employee health plan would pay for services in comparison to Medicare reimbursement rates. The legislation would have saved the state $88.5 million per fiscal year for hospital services.
It was opposed by stakeholders in the health care industry. Several amendments were filed on the bill on second reading, including to exempt some or all county hospitals.
The House author didn't call the bill down on its final eligible day, meaning it is now dead.
But the language could be inserted into other related bills during the remainder of the session.
A move to ban pill-based abortions, and to require women to file an affidavit of rape to meet one of the state's few exceptions, got no traction.
Sen. Mike Young, R-Indianapolis, filed Senate Bill 171 but it did not receive a hearing and died. It is unlikely the language would be moved elsewhere because Republican leaders in the House and Senate have said they're content with the current status of Indiana's abortion laws.
The legislation would have outlawed the use of abortion pills even in abortions that meet the state's narrow exemptions. And it would have required a woman who seeks an abortion under the state's rape or incest exceptions to provide the doctor with an affidavit under penalties of perjury attesting to the rape or incest. This requirement was defeated in 2022 during an amendment fight.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNBC
13 minutes ago
- CNBC
Elon Musk's favorability among Republicans dropped 16 points since March, Quinnipiac says
Elon Musk's official role in the Trump administration recently came to an end. Many Republicans won't be sad to see less of him, according to the results of Quinnipiac University's latest public opinion survey. While a majority of Republicans still hold a favorable view of Musk, the number fell to 62% in the poll out Wednesday, down from 78% in March, Quinnipiac said. Overall, the Quinnipiac poll found that 30% of self-identified voters surveyed in the U.S. hold a favorable opinion of Musk, according to polling from June 5 to June 9. Republican and Democratic voters remain deeply divided in their views of the world's richest man, who contributed nearly $300 million to propel President Donald Trump back to the White House. Only 3% of Democrats surveyed said they held a favorable of view of the Tesla CEO, who was once seen as an environmental leader appealing to liberal values. Musk didn't respond to a request for comment. Musk and Trump had a very public falling out last week that started with Musk's disapproval of the president's spending bill and escalated into an all-out war of words that played out on social media. Musk said on Wednesday that he regretted some of the posts he made about Trump last week, adding that "they went too far." Even with a slide in his favorability, Musk is still popular among Republicans after his time running the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an effort to dramatically slash the size of the federal government. Among the Republican respondents to the early June poll, 80% rated Musk and DOGE's work as either excellent or good, while 13% said it was either not so good or poor. In the March poll, 82% of Republicans surveyed said they thought Musk and DOGE were helping the country. Read the full survey results here.
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Democrats react to Trump's push for Texas redistricting
AUSTIN (Nexstar) — After reports of President Donald Trump convening a meeting Monday with members of the Texas congressional delegation, Texas Democrats say it shows the party is worried about potential losses in 2026. A report in the New York Times detailed a White House meeting in which the president pushed Texas congressmen to pursue a mid-decade redistricting effort. Republicans who spoke to both the Times and the Texas Tribune did not seem keen on the idea, which would require Gov. Greg Abbott to call a special session of the legislature. None of the 25 Republicans who represent Texas in the U.S. House responded to requests for comment, but a source close to the situation confirmed to KXAN that a meeting at the White House will take place Thursday. Changing the congressional map to advantage the GOP would likely require splitting up districts which currently lean heavily toward one party to create more competitive seats, a move that could backfire if Democrats have a good year in 2026. However, changes to the congressional districts in large metro areas like Houston or Dallas could net Republicans some seats without throwing any of their own into jeopardy. And even without redistricting, Republicans have clear pickup opportunities in Texas' 28th and 34th congressional districts — two south Texas districts which swung heavily to Trump in 2024. The current Texas congressional map is already overwhelmingly Republican, with 25 Republicans to 12 Democrats, though one heavily-Democratic seat is vacant. That leaves Republicans with nearly 66% of seats in a state in which Trump received 56% of the vote. Democrats say that the current map is already unfair, and a mid-decade redraw would be a sign of desperation for Republicans ahead of the 2026 midterms. State Rep. Gene Wu, D-Houston, said that Republicans' policies have been unpopular and that the GOP is trying to minimize losses in next year's House races. 'Donald Trump is desperate to cling on to the power that he's had, and he knows just how upset people are about what the Republicans have done in just a few months that they've been in office,' Wu said. 'People are pissed, and they know what's coming.' Wu cited policies passed out of the legislature in Texas, including a ban on all hemp-derived THC products as well as the school voucher program, championed by Abbott, as ways lawmakers have ignored voters. He attributed this to the safe districts which exist under the current maps. The congressional districts drawn in Texas currently do not favor competition — just two House races were decided by fewer than 14 points in the 2024 elections. The current maps — including for the state legislature — are undergoing litigation in El Paso over allegations that the maps were drawn to disadvantage Black and Latino voters. The Supreme Court has shown opposition to racial gerrymandering in recent years, striking down maps in Alabama and Louisiana for disadvantaging Black voters in those states. Wu described the current map as a 'racial gerrymander' and said that if Republicans want to draw an even more favorable map, they will likely succeed in doing so. This would not be the first time Republicans have attempted mid-decade redistricting in Texas. Back in 2003, as Texas was quickly changing from Democratic to Republican, the legislature redrew the maps to heavily advantage the GOP. Democrats lost five seats in the 2004 elections as a result. Democrats then walked out to try and prevent Republicans from meeting quorum and being able to vote on the maps. When asked what should be done about it in the event Republicans try it again, Wu did not give a clear answer, but accused Republicans of playing politics. 'Anytime you hear them talk about redistricting, especially if it's in the middle of the cycle, all this is about political games and trying to destroy our democracy,' Wu said. Congressman Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, also did not give a clear strategy, but said he has faith in the Austin-area Democrats. 'I hope they will do everything they can to protect the interest of our neighbors in Central Texas and not let some radical gerrymandering occur just because President Trump is desperate to be protected,' Doggett said. Any attempt by Republicans to redraw the maps would need to happen soon, with the filing deadline for the 2026 primary elections coming up at the end of the year. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Iowa governor vetoes bill restricting private pipelines' use of eminent domain
Gov. Kim Reynolds vetoed a bill Wednesday aimed at CO2 pipelines and eminent domain. She's pictured at her 2025 Condition of the State Address Jan. 14, 2025. (Photo by Robin Opsahl/Iowa Capital Dispatch) Gov. Kim Reynolds Wednesday vetoed a controversial bill pertaining to eminent domain and carbon sequestration pipelines in Iowa. House Republican leaders initiated an effort to reconvene the Legislature to override the veto, but Senate GOP leaders indicated that was unlikely. House File 639 would have increased insurance requirements for hazardous liquid pipelines, limited carbon pipeline permits to one 25-year term and changed the definition of a common carrier for pipelines, making it more difficult for the projects to use eminent domain. Reynolds, in a statement, said she shared the bill's goal of 'protecting landowners' but the bill lacked the 'clear, careful lines' drawn in good policy. 'It combines valid concerns with vague legal standards and sweeping mandates that reach far beyond their intended targets,' Reynolds said in a letter announcing her decision to veto. Reynolds followed her critique of the bill by noting that Iowa could lose its 'leadership position' as a top biofuel production state if legislation stopped the infrastructure necessary to enter ultra-low carbon markets. Central to the bill is a carbon sequestration pipeline project led by Summit Carbon Solutions that would transport liquid carbon dioxide, captured from biorefineries across Iowa, to underground storage in North Dakota. Farmers and the biofuels industry have been supportive of the Summit pipeline, and therefore opposed to the bill, because it would give Iowa access to the carbon capture and sequestration technologies necessary to make products like sustainable aviation fuels. In a statement following the governor's veto, Iowa Renewable Fuels Association Executive Director Monte Shaw said without carbon capture projects, and entry to ultra-low carbon fuel industry, Iowa could face 'very real, very severe economic consequences.' 'This is a classic example of why our system of government has checks and balances,' Shaw said. 'Any thoughtful review of this bill would determine that it would lead to higher energy prices for Iowans, hamper future economic development, hold back job creation, and stifle new markets for Iowa farmers. IRFA thanks Gov. Reynolds for listening to Iowans, studying the actual legislation, and ignoring the rhetoric that was as inaccurate as it was loud.' A press release from Iowa Corn Growers Association said entrance to the aviation fuel industry alone could result in nearly 6.5 million bushels of new corn demand, which it said is necessary for farmers dealing with high input costs and decreased profit margins. Farmers 'need expanded market growth and access to continue raising corn profitably; allowing them to continue growing Iowa's agricultural industry and economy,' the statement said. Opponents of the bill, including several lawmakers, argued the bill was aimed solely at carbon sequestration projects, rather than protecting landowners from eminent domain as supporters claimed. 'Eminent domain' allows the government to force private landowners to allow use of their property, for a fee set by the courts, for infrastructure projects deemed in the public interest. Eminent domain has long been used projects such as public roads and utilities. Leadership from Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy, or SIRE, said its CO2 pipeline project connecting to Nebraska's Tallgrass Trailblazer pipeline would be impacted by the bill's insurance and permit limit clauses, even though the SIRE project secured voluntary easements for 100% of its path in Iowa. Reynolds cited this example in her explanation, and said the 'arbitrary' term limits and insurance requirements would make it 'difficult for companies like SIRE to justify the additional investment' in Iowa. 'Those who crafted the bill said they don't want to stop CO2 pipelines that rely entirely on voluntary easements,' Reynolds said. 'But that is exactly what the bill does.' Summit Carbon Solutions thanked the governor for her 'thoughtful and thorough review' of the bill. In a statement, the company said the pipeline project 'opens the door to new markets and helps strengthen America's energy dominance for the long term.' 'Summit remains committed to working with landowners through voluntary agreements—just as we have with more than 1,300 Iowa landowners to date, resulting in $175 million in payments,' a spokesperson said in the statement. 'We look forward to continued discussions with state leaders as we advance this important project.' Opponents to the pipeline project, who were supportive of HF 639, argue the pipeline would negatively impact their properties and health, and that sequestering CO2 does not constitute a 'public use' deserving of eminent domain rights. Landowners opposed to the project lobbied state lawmakers for four years before a bill was debated, and ultimately passed, in the Senate and sent to the governor. Since the bill landed on the governor's desk, landowners have encouraged Reynolds to support Iowa GOP values on protecting property rights. Reynolds said the debate of when the government, or companies with government approval, can take private property is a 'debate as old as the Republic.' 'I've consistently said that if eminent domain is used, it must be rare, fair and a last resort,' Reynolds said. 'But HF 639 isn't just about eminent domain.' Reynolds said the bill sets a precedent that 'threatens' the state's 'energy reliability, economy and reputation as a place where businesses can invest with confidence.' Mary Powell, a Shelby County landowner opposed to the pipeline, said the veto shows that the state motto of, 'Our liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain' are 'just empty words' to the governor. 'Governor Reynolds chose to support the millionaires and billionaires at the expense of Iowans and their property rights,' Powell said in a statement. Another landowner, Don Johanssen from Cherokee County, said the governor's decision was 'beyond words,' especially as the bill would have given landowners 'some liability coverage' from hazardous pipelines. The bill would have required pipeline operator to carry insurance that covered any loss or injury from accidental, negligent or intentional discharges from the pipeline, and to cover insurance increases that landowners face due to the pipeline. 'This is a sad day for Iowa that will be long remembered,' Johanssen said. Reynolds said the bill would impact 'more than just CO2 infrastructure' and would change permitting rules 'across the board,' giving 'uncertainty into critical energy projects.' Opponents of the bill called the insurance requirements 'untenable.' The American Petroleum Institute's Midwest Regional Director Mike Karbo said the bill had 'unprecedented and unfeasible requirements' that would have hindered future projects in the state. 'Since there are no refineries in the state, critical energy infrastructure, such as pipelines, are crucial in ensuring Iowans have a reliable source of energy, and certainty is needed to develop the infrastructure network,' Karbo said. 'We thank the Governor for doing what is right for the future of energy development in the state.' Reynolds said HF 639 included 'a few helpful provisions' and the surrounding debate 'highlighted' areas for progress. 'I agree we can do more to limit the use of eminent domain, promote transparency, and ensure responsible land restoration,' Reynolds said. 'We can do better.' Reynolds, who is not running for reelection in 2026, said she is 'committed' to working with legislation to 'strengthen landowner protections, modernize permitting and respect private property.' Taking one element from HF 639, Reynolds will ask the IUC to require all commissioners to be present for live testimony and ensure at least one commissioner is present at every informational meeting. In a statement from Iowa House Republicans, Speaker Pat Grassley said he has requested members sign a petition to reconvene the Legislature in a special session. 'This veto is a major setback for Iowa,' Grassley said in the statement. 'It is a setback not only for landowners who have been fighting across Iowa, but for the work the House of Representatives has put in for four years to get legislation like HF 639 passed. We will not stop fighting and stand firm on our commitment until landowners' in Iowa are protected against Eminent Domain for private gain.' Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City, said he was 'very disappointed' in the governor's decision and that he was supportive of a special session to override the veto. Two-thirds of the Legislature must sign a petition to request a special session, and to override a veto, two-thirds of the members from each chamber must vote to pass the bill again. Sen. Jack Whitver, R-Grimes, the majority leader for the chamber, said he expects most of his caucus will 'not be interested in any attempt' to override the governor's veto. The bill likely would not have advanced in the Senate had it not been for a dozen Republican senators who vowed to block necessary budget legislation until the chamber debated eminent domain. The 12 were also joined by Senate Democrats in pushing for amendments, which were ultimately defeated, and approval of the bill. Senate Democrats said the fight for property rights will continue. 'I'm disappointed by the governor's veto of HF639, but, unfortunately, I cannot say I'm surprised,' Sen. Janice Weiner, D-Iowa City, said. 'There is simply no amount of political posturing or legislative stonewalling that can deny the fact that Iowans' right to private property should never be infringed upon for private gain.' One of the 12 to disagree with the Senate majority, Sen. Kevin Alons, R-Salix, said signing the bill was 'the single option available' to protect the rights of impacted landowners. Alons pledged to 'never quit working' on the issue, but said that means 'very little' to landowners who have been impacted by the 'unprecedented, and unconstitutional land grab.' 'To be clear: the Iowa government has given this private company the right to take people's land for one reason: corporate earnings,' Alons said in a statement. 'This has nothing to do with public use. It's absolutely not necessary for the ethanol industry in our state … And it certainly is not what the founders had in mind.' Alons said when the Legislature returns in January, he and other lawmakers 'will use every tool at our disposal' to 'return property rights back to the people.' Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, who sponsored the legislation, wrote in a social media post he was 'profoundly disappointed' by the veto. Holt said the state constitution and the Republican platform are clear in their message that eminent domain is for public use projects. 'Today the Governor has chosen to ignore landowners, the vast majority of the Legislature, the Republican Party Platform and the Iowa Constitution by choosing the economic development argument of special interests,' Holt wrote. Holt said Reynolds, and the Senate had opportunities of the past several years to offer their own suggestions to the eminent domain issue instead of opposing House legislation. 'On behalf of the people of Iowa and their fundamental property rights, the Governor's veto should be overridden,' he wrote. 'This fight for who we are as Republicans is far from over.' House Democratic Leader Rep. Brian Meyer said parties in the House collaborated to 'protect property rights.' 'At the end of the day, there is only one group to blame for the failure of the eminent domain bill: Iowa Republican lawmakers,' Meyer said in a statement. The first phase of the Summit Carbon Solutions project was approved by IUC nearly a year ago, which granted Summit the right to condemn easements from landowners who do not want to voluntarily sign agreements to put the pipeline on their land. Per the Iowa permit, Summit still needs a permit from South Dakota, which it has been denied twice, to begin construction. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE