Indiana · individual fact

Indiana health

Insurance coverage, personal healthcare spending, longevity, mortality, health risks, and provider shortages.

Uninsured rate · all ages7.5%2024 · #25 of 50 · highest first
Uninsured rate · under age 658.9%2024 · #25 of 50 · highest first
Private coverage · under age 6570.6%2024 · #30 of 50 · highest first

Indiana over time

Explore Indiana readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Indiana officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Indiana effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Indiana change.

Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear

Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.

Uninsured rate · all ages Indiana · source units
IndianaPublished U.S. benchmark

Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.

Uninsured rate · all ages2024: 7.5%5.9%9.4%12.9%Indiana, 2014: 11.9%Indiana, 2015: 9.6%Indiana, 2016: 8.1%Indiana, 2017: 8.2%Indiana, 2018: 8.3%Indiana, 2019: 8.7%Indiana, 2021: 7.5%Indiana, 2022: 7%Indiana, 2023: 6.9%Indiana, 2024: 7.5%201420192024
✦ Major events & context · 25National context · Affordable Care Act signed · 2010-03-23ACA signedNational context · Supreme Court makes ACA Medicaid expansion optional for states · 2012-06-28Medicaid expansion rulingNational context · ACA Marketplace coverage and main Medicaid expansion begin · 2014-01-01ACA coverage beginsNational context · Opioid crisis declared a national public-health emergency · 2017-10-26Opioid emergencyNational context · COVID-19 characterized as a pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Pandemic Medicaid continuous-enrollment condition enacted · 2020-03-18Medicaid coverage protectionNational context · FDA authorizes the first COVID-19 vaccine for emergency use · 2020-12-11First COVID vaccine EUANational context · American Rescue Plan expands Marketplace premium assistance · 2021-03-11Marketplace aid expandedNational context · No Surprises Act billing protections begin · 2022-01-01Surprise-billing protectionsNational context · Supreme Court overturns Roe and Casey in Dobbs · 2022-06-24Dobbs abortion rulingNational context · 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline launches nationwide · 2022-07-16988 crisis line launchesNational context · Inflation Reduction Act signed · 2022-08-16Prescription-drug lawNational context · Medicare Part D insulin cost-sharing cap takes effect · 2023-01-01Part D insulin $35 capNational context · Medicaid coverage terminations can resume · 2023-04-01Medicaid terminations resumeNational context · Federal COVID-19 public-health emergency ends · 2023-05-11COVID health emergency endsIndiana · Indiana launches PathWays for Aging · 2024-07-01Indiana PathWays launchNational context · Medicare Part D out-of-pocket cap begins · 2025-01-01Part D $2,000 cap (2025)Indiana · Indiana approves PathWays provider-payment changes · 2025-05-01Indiana PathWays payment rulesNational context · 2025 reconciliation law changes Medicaid and funds rural care · 2025-07-04Medicaid and rural-care lawNational context · Rural Health Transformation awards announced for all 50 states · 2025-12-29Rural health awardsNational context · Temporary enhanced Marketplace premium tax credits end · 2026-01-01Enhanced ACA credits endNational context · First negotiated Medicare drug prices take effect · 2026-01-01Negotiated drug prices beginNational context · CMS issues Medicaid community-engagement implementation rule · 2026-06-01Medicaid eligibility ruleIndiana · Indiana signs radioactive-materials regulatory agreement · 2026-09-24Radiation agreement signedIndiana · Shelbyville opens a nonprofit community-service center · 2026-09-30Shelbyville community resources● Indiana Legislature · 37223323323● U.S. Congress · Indiana delegation · 72◆ Governor · 2■ Indiana agencies · 52010-03-012026-09-30

51 of 51 reviewed Indiana actions match · 36 date markers shown. 25 major events shown separately.

Indiana · 2024: 7.5% · Rank #25 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2%

FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population. ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.

View observations and export data
Indiana Uninsured rate · all ages · source units
PeriodIndianaRankU.S. benchmark
20247.5%#25 of 508.2%
20236.9%#23 of 50Not available
20227%#23 of 50Not available
20217.5%#25 of 50Not available
2020Not availableUnavailableNot available
20198.7%#22 of 50Not available
20188.3%#21 of 50Not available
20178.2%#24 of 50Not available
20168.1%#23 of 50Not available
20159.6%#21 of 50Not available
201411.9%#20 of 50Not available
How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

Indiana · state comparison

Who has health coverage?

Compare ACS annual estimates for all ages or people under 65. Coverage categories can overlap and do not sum to the insured share.

Indiana · 20247.5%
Indiana rank#25among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark8.2%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Uninsured rate · all ages

FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population.

ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Indiana
Uninsured rate · all ages history in Indiana6.2%9.4%12.7%20142024
2024 · Indiana: 7.5% · Rank #25 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Indiana Uninsured rate · all ages history
PeriodIndianaCompare
201411.9%
20159.6%
20168.1%
20178.2%
20188.3%
20198.7%
2020Not available
20217.5%
20227%
20236.9%
20247.5%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Indiana stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Indiana has a dark outline.

Lower value · 2.8%Higher value · 16.7%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Indiana · 7.5%2024 · Rank #25 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Indiana with every state · 50 ranked
Uninsured rate · all ages · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Texas16.7%—
#2Georgia12%—
#3Oklahoma11.5%—
#4Nevada11.4%—
#5Alaska11%—
#6Florida10.9%—
#7Arizona10.3%—
#7Wyoming10.3%—
#9New Mexico10.1%—
#10Mississippi9.7%—
#10Tennessee9.7%—
#12Arkansas9.4%—
#13Idaho9.2%—
#14South Carolina9%—
#15Montana8.8%—
#16North Carolina8.6%—
#17Kansas8.5%—
#18Utah8.3%—
#19Alabama8.2%—
#20South Dakota8.1%—
#21Colorado7.9%—
#22Louisiana7.7%—
#22Missouri7.7%—
#22New Jersey7.7%—
#25Indiana · your comparison7.5%—
#26Nebraska7.1%—
#27Delaware6.9%—
#27Illinois6.9%—
#27Virginia6.9%—
#30Kentucky6.8%—
#31Ohio6.7%—
#32Washington6.5%—
#33Maryland6.3%—
#34North Dakota6.1%—
#35California5.9%—
#36Connecticut5.8%—
#36Pennsylvania5.8%—
#36West Virginia5.8%—
#39Maine5.5%—
#40Iowa5.4%—
#41Wisconsin5.3%—
#42Oregon5.2%—
#43Michigan5.1%—
#43Minnesota5.1%—
#45New York5%—
#46Rhode Island4.6%—
#47New Hampshire4.5%—
#48Vermont4.2%—
#49Hawaii3.5%—
#50Massachusetts2.8%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

People under 65 without health insurance

8.9%2024 ACS annual estimate

Share of Indiana’s civilian noninstitutionalized residents under age 65 who lacked comprehensive health-insurance coverage at the time of the ACS survey.

This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.

Method and limitations

U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts, sourced from the 2024 American Community Survey 1-year estimate.

  • This is a survey estimate for people under 65 and does not describe coverage type or continuity of coverage.
  • Insurance status alone does not measure affordability, access, quality, or health outcomes.
Indiana · state comparison

Where do healthcare dollars go?

State spending is reported for 2020, the latest year available in this CMS state series. Choose a service to compare Indiana with every state.

Indiana · 2020$10,517
Indiana rank#18among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$10,191Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Personal healthcare spending per resident

Personal health care expenditure per resident, assigned to the state where the patient resides.

2020 is the last year in this CMS state series. Personal health care excludes administration, public health, and investment included in national health expenditures. This is spending by all payers, not a household bill.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Indiana
Personal healthcare spending per resident history in Indiana$7.55K$9.23K$10.9K20142020
2020 · Indiana: $10,517 · Rank #18 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $10,191 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Indiana Personal healthcare spending per resident history
PeriodIndianaCompare
2014$7,998
2015$8,368
2016$8,776
2017$9,015
2018$9,297
2019$9,927
2020$10,517

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Indiana stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Indiana has a dark outline.

Lower value · $7.52KHigher value · $14.01KStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Indiana · $10,5172020 · Rank #18 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Indiana with every state · 50 ranked
Personal healthcare spending per resident · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1New York$14,007—
#2Alaska$13,642—
#3Massachusetts$13,319—
#4Delaware$12,899—
#5West Virginia$12,769—
#6Vermont$12,756—
#7South Dakota$12,495—
#8Connecticut$12,489—
#9Maine$12,077—
#10New Jersey$11,868—
#11New Hampshire$11,793—
#12Rhode Island$11,694—
#13Pennsylvania$11,603—
#14North Dakota$11,301—
#15Wyoming$10,989—
#16Minnesota$10,846—
#17Maryland$10,839—
#18Indiana · your comparison$10,517—
#19Louisiana$10,515—
#20Nebraska$10,514—
#21Ohio$10,478—
#22California$10,299—
#23Hawaii$10,291—
#24Kentucky$10,257—
#25Montana$10,212—
#26Illinois$10,190—
#27Oregon$10,071—
#28Wisconsin$9,982—
#29Missouri$9,921—
#30Michigan$9,897—
#31Florida$9,865—
#32Iowa$9,789—
#33Oklahoma$9,444—
#34Kansas$9,408—
#35Mississippi$9,394—
#36Arkansas$9,338—
#37Tennessee$9,336—
#38Alabama$9,280—
#39Washington$9,265—
#40Virginia$9,195—
#41North Carolina$8,917—
#42New Mexico$8,902—
#43South Carolina$8,766—
#44Georgia$8,758—
#45Arizona$8,756—
#46Colorado$8,583—
#47Texas$8,406—
#48Nevada$8,348—
#49Idaho$8,148—
#50Utah$7,522—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Indiana · state comparison

Health outcomes

Use age-adjusted mortality to account for different age distributions; life expectancy summarizes period death rates.

Indiana · 202275.4 years
Indiana rank#39among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark77.5 yearsSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Life expectancy at birth

FactVote uses CDC National Center for Health Statistics annual complete life-table estimates for the total Indiana population. Values are rounded to the published tenth of a year.

The latest published comparable state series ends in 2022, even though newer national life-expectancy estimates may be available. Period life expectancy summarizes current mortality rates; it is not a forecast of how long a particular person will live. The 2020 and 2021 estimates reflect the mortality shock during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Indiana
Life expectancy at birth history in Indiana74.2 years76.1 years77.9 years20182022
2022 · Indiana: 75.4 years · Rank #39 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 77.5 years · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Indiana Life expectancy at birth history
PeriodIndianaCompare
201876.8 years
201977 years
202075 years
202174.6 years
202275.4 years

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Indiana stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Indiana has a dark outline.

Lower value · 72.2 yearsHigher value · 80 yearsStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Indiana · 75.4 years2022 · Rank #39 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Indiana with every state · 50 ranked
Life expectancy at birth · 2022 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Hawaii80 years—
#2Massachusetts79.8 years—
#3New Jersey79.6 years—
#4New York79.5 years—
#5Connecticut79.4 years—
#6California79.3 years—
#6Minnesota79.3 years—
#8Rhode Island79.2 years—
#9Utah79 years—
#10New Hampshire78.7 years—
#11Colorado78.5 years—
#12Idaho78.4 years—
#12Washington78.4 years—
#14Nebraska78.3 years—
#14Vermont78.3 years—
#16Wisconsin78.1 years—
#17Florida77.9 years—
#17Iowa77.9 years—
#17North Dakota77.9 years—
#20Maryland77.8 years—
#21Oregon77.7 years—
#22Illinois77.5 years—
#22Virginia77.5 years—
#24Montana77.3 years—
#24Pennsylvania77.3 years—
#24South Dakota77.3 years—
#27Texas77.1 years—
#28Michigan76.8 years—
#28Wyoming76.8 years—
#30Arizona76.7 years—
#31Maine76.6 years—
#32Delaware76.5 years—
#32Kansas76.5 years—
#34Nevada76.4 years—
#35Georgia75.9 years—
#35North Carolina75.9 years—
#37Alaska75.8 years—
#38Ohio75.6 years—
#39Indiana · your comparison75.4 years—
#40Missouri75.2 years—
#41South Carolina75.1 years—
#42New Mexico74.5 years—
#43Arkansas73.9 years—
#44Alabama73.8 years—
#44Louisiana73.8 years—
#44Oklahoma73.8 years—
#44Tennessee73.8 years—
#48Kentucky73.6 years—
#49Mississippi72.6 years—
#50West Virginia72.2 years—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Indiana · state comparison

Chronic illness and health risks

Compare age-adjusted adult prevalence using the same survey year and definition.

Indiana · 202311.7%
Indiana rank#9among 48 states with data
U.S. benchmark10.7%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted

Adult self-reported prevalence, age-adjusted to a common population.

Published CDC 2019–2023 series. Missing or suppressed estimates remain unranked. Confidence intervals describe sampling uncertainty; point ranks are not significance tests.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Indiana
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history in Indiana9.7%10.9%12%20192023
2023 · Indiana: 11.7% · Rank #9 of 48, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 10.7% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Indiana Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history
PeriodIndianaCompare
201911.3%
202010.7%
202111%
202211.3%
202311.7%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Indiana stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Indiana has a dark outline.

Lower value · 7.8%Higher value · 15.1%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Indiana · 11.7%2023 · Rank #9 of 48, highest first95% confidence interval: 11.1% – 12.4%Selected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Indiana with every state · 48 ranked, 2 unavailable
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted · 2023 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Mississippi15.1%95% CI: 13.7–16.6
#1West Virginia15.1%95% CI: 13.9–16.3
#3Louisiana14.6%95% CI: 13.4–15.8
#4Alabama14%95% CI: 12.7–15.3
#5Arkansas13.1%95% CI: 12–14.3
#6South Carolina12.7%95% CI: 11.9–13.6
#6Tennessee12.7%95% CI: 11.7–13.8
#8Texas12.1%95% CI: 11–13.3
#9Indiana · your comparison11.7%95% CI: 11.1–12.4
#10Georgia11.5%95% CI: 10.7–12.3
#10Ohio11.5%95% CI: 10.8–12.2
#12Oklahoma11.3%95% CI: 10.5–12.1
#13Delaware11.1%95% CI: 9.8–12.6
#14North Carolina11%95% CI: 9.8–12.3
#15Illinois10.9%95% CI: 9.9–12.1
#15Maryland10.9%95% CI: 10.2–11.7
#15Michigan10.9%95% CI: 10.1–11.8
#18Nevada10.8%95% CI: 8.9–13
#18New Mexico10.8%95% CI: 9.3–12.6
#20Missouri10.7%95% CI: 9.9–11.7
#20South Dakota10.7%95% CI: 8.9–12.8
#22California10.6%95% CI: 9.8–11.4
#23Kansas10.5%95% CI: 9.7–11.3
#24Virginia10.4%95% CI: 9.5–11.4
#25Florida10.1%95% CI: 9.1–11.1
#26Rhode Island10%95% CI: 9.1–11
#27Arizona9.9%95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#27Iowa9.9%95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#29Nebraska9.7%95% CI: 9–10.3
#30Wisconsin9.6%95% CI: 9–10.2
#31Hawaii9.5%95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#31New York9.5%95% CI: 8.9–10.1
#31Oregon9.5%95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#34Wyoming9.4%95% CI: 8.5–10.5
#35Minnesota9.3%95% CI: 8.6–10
#36New Jersey9.1%95% CI: 8.4–9.9
#37Maine9%95% CI: 8.4–9.7
#38North Dakota8.9%95% CI: 8.1–9.7
#39Idaho8.7%95% CI: 7.9–9.6
#40Washington8.6%95% CI: 8.2–9
#41Massachusetts8.5%95% CI: 7.8–9.4
#42Connecticut8.4%95% CI: 7.6–9.3
#43Alaska8.2%95% CI: 7.4–9.2
#44Utah8.1%95% CI: 7.5–8.7
#45Colorado8%95% CI: 7.3–8.7
#46Montana7.9%95% CI: 7.2–8.7
#46New Hampshire7.9%95% CI: 7.1–8.8
#48Vermont7.8%95% CI: 7–8.7
—KentuckyNot availableNo comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
—PennsylvaniaNot availableNo comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Indiana · state comparison

Where are healthcare workers in short supply?

Compare coverage of need, practitioners needed, or affected population for each discipline.

Indiana · June 30, 202654.2%
Indiana rank#19among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark47.4%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Primary care · need met

HRSA-designated shortage areas; measures describe need within those areas, not the entire state population.

National report totals can include territories. Designation rules and populations differ by discipline; do not add disciplines. Absolute population and practitioner ranks also reflect state size.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Indiana stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Indiana has a dark outline.

Lower value · 11.2%Higher value · 83.2%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Indiana · 54.2%June 30, 2026 · Rank #19 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Indiana with every state · 50 ranked
Primary care · need met · June 30, 2026 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1New Jersey83.2%—
#2Vermont82.6%—
#3South Carolina79.4%—
#4New Hampshire74.8%—
#5Rhode Island74.3%—
#6Louisiana72.1%—
#7Hawaii67.1%—
#8Utah65.4%—
#9Wisconsin65.2%—
#10Alabama63%—
#11Connecticut60.3%—
#12Massachusetts58%—
#13Tennessee58%—
#14Virginia57.2%—
#15Pennsylvania56.7%—
#16Maine56%—
#17Minnesota55.4%—
#18Wyoming54.4%—
#19Indiana · your comparison54.2%—
#20California53.2%—
#21Arkansas52.6%—
#22Texas49.8%—
#23Ohio49.7%—
#24Nebraska49.1%—
#25Alaska48.9%—
#26North Carolina48.1%—
#27Colorado47.5%—
#28Michigan44.9%—
#29Oregon43.9%—
#30Idaho43.9%—
#31Washington42.4%—
#32Illinois41.5%—
#33Nevada41.5%—
#34Arizona41.2%—
#35Kansas41.1%—
#36Iowa40.5%—
#37Florida39.7%—
#38Georgia39.1%—
#39Montana38.5%—
#40West Virginia38.3%—
#41North Dakota36.5%—
#42New York35.3%—
#43South Dakota34.6%—
#44Mississippi34.1%—
#45Maryland31.6%—
#46New Mexico31.4%—
#47Kentucky30.8%—
#48Oklahoma28.6%—
#49Missouri23.7%—
#50Delaware11.2%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Indiana · state comparison

Employer coverage costs

Premium comparisons use a published historical all-state employer survey. Total premiums combine employer and employee payments.

Indiana · 2020$7,319
Indiana rank#17among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$7,149Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Single coverage premium · all firms

Average total annual employer-plan premium per enrolled employee at private-sector establishments offering coverage.

Historical 2020 published all-state table; not a current quote. Includes both employer and employee contributions, rather than just a worker’s payment. Survey estimates and small firm samples carry uncertainty. Missing estimates remain unavailable.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Indiana stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Indiana has a dark outline.

Lower value · $6.39KHigher value · $8.64KStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Indiana · $7,3192020 · Rank #17 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Indiana with every state · 50 ranked
Single coverage premium · all firms · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Alaska$8,635—
#2New York$8,177—
#3New Hampshire$7,991—
#4Vermont$7,868—
#5Wyoming$7,743—
#6Nebraska$7,611—
#7South Carolina$7,516—
#8Connecticut$7,501—
#9Maine$7,496—
#10Massachusetts$7,452—
#11Washington$7,440—
#12New Mexico$7,424—
#13Illinois$7,376—
#14New Jersey$7,373—
#15Maryland$7,352—
#16Rhode Island$7,326—
#17Indiana · your comparison$7,319—
#18Delaware$7,280—
#19Wisconsin$7,250—
#20Pennsylvania$7,246—
#21North Dakota$7,216—
#22Colorado$7,206—
#23Missouri$7,179—
#24California$7,173—
#25Florida$7,078—
#26South Dakota$7,070—
#27Oklahoma$7,058—
#28Hawaii$7,040—
#29North Carolina$7,036—
#30Texas$7,017—
#31West Virginia$6,993—
#32Ohio$6,989—
#33Kentucky$6,949—
#34Iowa$6,932—
#35Virginia$6,928—
#36Oregon$6,917—
#37Minnesota$6,910—
#38Georgia$6,876—
#39Montana$6,860—
#40Idaho$6,744—
#41Louisiana$6,713—
#42Michigan$6,683—
#43Kansas$6,675—
#44Arizona$6,612—
#45Utah$6,593—
#46Mississippi$6,561—
#47Nevada$6,493—
#48Tennessee$6,485—
#49Arkansas$6,414—
#50Alabama$6,393—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Indiana · state comparison

Mental health and treatment

Adult statewide estimates use the same SAMHSA model and survey period. Treatment use is a share of all adults, not a share of adults with mental illness.

Indiana · 2023–202425.3%
Indiana rank#14among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark23.1%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Any Mental Illness · adults 18+

Civilian noninstitutionalized adults age 18+, past-year prevalence or treatment use, estimated by small-area survey models.

Mental illness and depression estimates pool 2023–2024; treatment use covers 2024 only. Definitions and model-based uncertainty differ from the national page’s annual 2025 survey estimates. Point-estimate ranks do not establish significant differences. Serious mental illness is a subset of any mental illness, so their percentages must not be added.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Indiana stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Indiana has a dark outline.

Lower value · 18.1%Higher value · 31.6%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Indiana · 25.3%2023–2024 · Rank #14 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Indiana with every state · 50 ranked
Any Mental Illness · adults 18+ · 2023–2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Oregon31.6%—
#2Vermont29.1%—
#3West Virginia28.1%—
#4Washington27.9%—
#5New Hampshire27.7%—
#6Tennessee27%—
#7Utah26.7%—
#8Maine26.7%—
#9Arkansas26.6%—
#10Colorado26.4%—
#11Rhode Island25.8%—
#12Missouri25.7%—
#13Montana25.6%—
#14Indiana · your comparison25.3%—
#15Kentucky25.3%—
#16Georgia25.2%—
#17Iowa25%—
#18Massachusetts24.9%—
#19Wyoming24.7%—
#20Nevada24.6%—
#21Arizona24.6%—
#22Wisconsin24.6%—
#23Idaho24.5%—
#24Nebraska24.1%—
#25Louisiana24.1%—
#26Alaska24%—
#27Pennsylvania23.9%—
#28New Mexico23.9%—
#28Ohio23.9%—
#30Connecticut23.7%—
#31Kansas23.7%—
#32Michigan23.6%—
#33Virginia23.1%—
#34Alabama23%—
#35North Dakota23%—
#36Maryland22.7%—
#37Oklahoma22.6%—
#38Minnesota22.6%—
#39Illinois22.2%—
#40Delaware22.1%—
#41New York21.9%—
#42South Dakota21.8%—
#43California21.6%—
#44North Carolina21.4%—
#45Florida20.8%—
#46Texas20.7%—
#47Mississippi20.5%—
#48Hawaii19.8%—
#49South Carolina19.8%—
#50New Jersey18.1%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health from FactVote’s Indiana candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.

51 statements from 11 candidates

2026 Indiana U.S. House — District 1 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 5 statements

Frank J. Mrvan

5 statements

Democratic · U.S. House District 1 · IN

Health coverage

Frank is in Congress to lower the price of healthcare and to make prescription drug prices more affordable, so families can obtain the lifesaving medicine they need. That’s why Frank fought to pass the Inflation Reduction Act, which allows Medicare to directly negotiate prescription drug prices, lim…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care

Candidate campaign source

Frank is in Congress to lower the price of healthcare and to make prescription drug prices more affordable, so families can obtain the lifesaving medicine they need. That’s why Frank fought to pass the Inflation Reduction Act, which allows Medicare to directly negotiate prescription drug prices, limits out-of-pocket costs for insulin at $35 per month, and for the first time ever, caps Medicare Part D out-of-pocket drug costs at $2,000 — a proud achievement of Frank’s.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Frank J. Mrvan — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
View 4 more statements from Frank J. Mrvan
Healthcare costs

Since he was the North Township Trustee, Frank has been working to improve access to quality, affordable healthcare for communities throughout our region. This includes helping seniors afford prescription drugs, providing veterans with critical mental health services, and supporting women seeking re…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Reproductive rights and health care

Candidate campaign source

Since he was the North Township Trustee, Frank has been working to improve access to quality, affordable healthcare for communities throughout our region. This includes helping seniors afford prescription drugs, providing veterans with critical mental health services, and supporting women seeking reproductive care.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Frank J. Mrvan — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
Care & public health

Freedom is on the ballot this year. After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Indiana was the first state in the country to institute a statewide abortion ban. Women’s access to reproductive healthcare is under attack. With federal legislation proposed to ban abortion nationwide, it’s more imp…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Reproductive rights and health care

Candidate campaign source

Freedom is on the ballot this year. After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Indiana was the first state in the country to institute a statewide abortion ban. Women’s access to reproductive healthcare is under attack. With federal legislation proposed to ban abortion nationwide, it’s more important than ever that we send Frank back to Congress to fight for our freedoms. Frank supports the codification of Roe v. Wade and will continue to fight to ensure that every woman can make their own decisions about their own bodies, their own futures, and their own economic opportunities.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Frank J. Mrvan — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
Care & public health

Freedom is on the ballot this year. Frank is committed to protecting Women’s access to reproductive health care and supports the codification of Roe.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Reproductive rights and health care

Candidate campaign source

Freedom is on the ballot this year. Frank is committed to protecting Women’s access to reproductive health care and supports the codification of Roe.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Frank J. Mrvan — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
Care & public health

Frank will stand with women. He will make sure Roe v. Wade is the law of the land and that women can safely access the reproductive healthcare they need.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Reproductive rights and health care

Candidate campaign source

Frank will stand with women. He will make sure Roe v. Wade is the law of the land and that women can safely access the reproductive healthcare they need.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Frank J. Mrvan — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗

2026 Indiana U.S. House — District 2 — General Election

2 candidates with matching statements · 5 statements

Jamee Decio

1 statement

Democratic · U.S. House District 2 · IN

Care & public health

Americans pay more for healthcare than anywhere else in the world, yet our system prioritizes profits over people and leaves working families behind, struggling to afford basic care while insurance companies and pharmaceutical corporations extract wealth and diminish access to care in our local comm…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Policy Platform

Candidate campaign source

Americans pay more for healthcare than anywhere else in the world, yet our system prioritizes profits over people and leaves working families behind, struggling to afford basic care while insurance companies and pharmaceutical corporations extract wealth and diminish access to care in our local communities.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 18, 2026

Jamee Decio campaign source 5 ↗

William Eric Henry

4 statements

Libertarian · U.S. House District 2 · IN

Care & public health

National Defense and Veterans Care –• Strong National Defense for our protection and emergencies• Support "Defend the Guard" legislation• Border policy and protections improvements• Eliminate Red Flag and domestic spying laws• Reduce and end foreign conflict and costly overseas contingency operation…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Immigration and border policy

Candidate campaign source

National Defense and Veterans Care –• Strong National Defense for our protection and emergencies• Support "Defend the Guard" legislation• Border policy and protections improvements• Eliminate Red Flag and domestic spying laws• Reduce and end foreign conflict and costly overseas contingency operations and contracts• Expand community healthcare programs for veterans, and better integrate records, billing, and coding for community healthcare access

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026

William Eric Henry — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
View 3 more statements from William Eric Henry
Care & public health

• Expand community healthcare programs for veterans, and better integrate records, billing, and coding for community healthcare access

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: • Reduce and end foreign conflict and costly overseas contingency operations and contracts

Candidate campaign source

• Expand community healthcare programs for veterans, and better integrate records, billing, and coding for community healthcare access

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026

William Eric Henry — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

Medical Freedom –• Define and resolve personal sovereignty, or self-ownership• Regain individual medical and personal decisions• Demand independent review of the vaccine approval and access to all research data• Remove legal protections for vaccines • Further protect privacy of patients• End federal…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care

Candidate campaign source

Medical Freedom –• Define and resolve personal sovereignty, or self-ownership• Regain individual medical and personal decisions• Demand independent review of the vaccine approval and access to all research data• Remove legal protections for vaccines • Further protect privacy of patients• End federal cannabis prohibition and expunge all federal cannabis records

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026

William Eric Henry — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

Medical Freedom – • Define and resolve personal sovereignty, or self-ownership • Regain individual medical and personal decisions • Demand independent review of the vaccine approval and access to all research data • Remove legal protections for vaccines • Further protect privacy of patients • End fe…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Issues

Candidate campaign source

Medical Freedom – • Define and resolve personal sovereignty, or self-ownership • Regain individual medical and personal decisions • Demand independent review of the vaccine approval and access to all research data • Remove legal protections for vaccines • Further protect privacy of patients • End federal cannabis prohibition and expunge all federal cannabis records

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026

William Eric Henry — campaign source ↗

2026 Indiana U.S. House — District 4 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 2 statements

Drew Cox

2 statements

Democratic · U.S. House District 4 · IN

Health coverage

Medicare for All

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: The Issues

Candidate campaign source

Medicare for All

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Drew Cox — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
View 1 more statement from Drew Cox
Care & public health

Fully Fund Veterans' Healthcare

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: The Issues

Candidate campaign source

Fully Fund Veterans' Healthcare

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Drew Cox — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 3
How statements are selected

This section matches specific health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health terms in retained, attributed source text from published Indiana candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.

Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.

Indiana incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Indiana legislators and Indiana’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Indiana’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

102 matching sponsorships or proposals · 56 Indiana incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Rep. Alex Burton

Indiana House of Representatives, District 77 · D–IN

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Alex Burton
Indiana Legislature · HB 1100

Health insurance coverage for adoptive children.

Jan 12, 2026 · Did not pass

Rep. Wendy Dant Chesser · Co-sponsored / Rep. Alex Burton · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The proposal would let adoptive parents opt a child out of Medicaid when private dependent coverage is available, subject to a check against a coverage lapse. This concerns continuity for already-insured children, not a general expansion to uninsured residents.

The official Indiana General Assembly record lists this final action on January 12, 2026: Representative Dant Chesser added as coauthor. The measure became inactive when the 2026 session ended.

Why this record is included

The proposal would let adoptive parents opt a child out of Medicaid when private dependent coverage is available, subject to a check against a coverage lapse. This concerns continuity for already-insured children, not a general expansion to uninsured residents. The fact measures whether residents under 65 have coverage, rather than the number of services covered or used.

Retained Indiana evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

The proposal would let adoptive parents opt a child out of Medicaid when private dependent coverage is available, subject to a check against a coverage lapse. This concerns continuity for already-insured children, not a general expansion to uninsured residents.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. André Carson

U.S. representative for Indiana, District 7 · D–IN

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. André Carson
U.S. Congress · Indiana delegation · H.R.4487

Gun Safety Incentive Act

Jul 17, 2025 · Introduced

Rep. André Carson · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The proposal would require safe-storage notices and devices with specified firearm sales, fund distribution of storage devices and create a tax credit for retail sales of qualifying devices.

Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

Why this record is included

The proposal would require safe-storage notices and devices with specified firearm sales, fund distribution of storage devices and create a tax credit for retail sales of qualifying devices. The official record directly regulates firearms or addresses shootings, firearm safety, trafficking, or gun-violence prevention. It does not establish an effect on Indiana's firearm mortality rate.

Retained Indiana evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

The proposal would require safe-storage notices and devices with specified firearm sales, fund distribution of storage devices and create a tax credit for retail sales of qualifying devices.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Ben Smaltz

Indiana House of Representatives, District 52 · R–IN

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Ben Smaltz
Indiana Legislature · HB 1296

Firearms matters.

Mar 21, 2022 · Enacted · Public Law 175

Rep. Ben Smaltz · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

Repeals the law that requires a person to obtain a license to carry a handgun in Indiana. Specifies that certain persons who are not otherwise prohibited from carrying or possessing a handgun are not required to obtain or possess a license or permit from the state to carry a handgun in Indiana. Prohibits certain individuals from knowingly or intentionally carrying a handgun. Creates the crime of "unlawful carrying of a handgun" and specifies the penalties for committing this crime. Allows particular individuals who do not meet the requirements to receive a handgun license and are not otherwise prohibited to carry a handgun in limited places. Allows a resident of Indiana to obtain in certain…

The Indiana legislative record shows the measure was enacted on March 21, 2022 as Public Law 175.

Why this record is included

The official record directly regulates firearms or addresses shootings, firearm safety, trafficking, or gun-violence prevention. It does not establish an effect on Indiana's firearm mortality rate.

Retained Indiana evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Repeals the law that requires a person to obtain a license to carry a handgun in Indiana. Specifies that certain persons who are not otherwise prohibited from carrying or possessing a handgun are not required to obtain or possess a license or permit from the state to carry a handgun in Indiana. Prohibits certain individuals from knowingly or intentionally carrying a handgun. Creates the crime of "unlawful carrying of a handgun" and specifies the penalties for committing this crime. Allows particular individuals who do not meet the requirements to receive a handgun license and are not otherwise prohibited to carry a handgun in limited places…
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Brad Barrett

Indiana House of Representatives, District 56 · R–IN

4 proposals
View proposals from Rep. Brad Barrett
Indiana Legislature · SB 1

Human services matters.

Mar 4, 2026 · Enacted · Public Law 63

Rep. Brad Barrett · Sponsored / Sen. Ed Charbonneau · Sponsored / Sen. Ryan Mishler · Sponsored / Sen. Chris Garten · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The law changes Medicaid eligibility, application timing, immigration-status rules, work requirements and renewal frequency, including semiannual Healthy Indiana Plan renewal. Its SNAP and service-cost provisions are separate.

The Indiana legislative record shows the measure was enacted on March 4, 2026 as Public Law 63.

Why this record is included

The law changes Medicaid eligibility, application timing, immigration-status rules, work requirements and renewal frequency, including semiannual Healthy Indiana Plan renewal. Its SNAP and service-cost provisions are separate. The fact measures whether residents under 65 have coverage, rather than the number of services covered or used.

Retained Indiana evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance · Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

The law changes Medicaid eligibility, application timing, immigration-status rules, work requirements and renewal frequency, including semiannual Healthy Indiana Plan renewal. Its SNAP and service-cost provisions are separate.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Indiana Legislature · HB 1474 · Public Law 174

FSSA and PathWays provider-payment rules

May 1, 2025 · Enacted · Public Law 174

Rep. Brad Barrett · Sponsored / Rep. Robb Greene · Co-sponsored / Rep. Tony Isa · Co-sponsored / Rep. Maureen Bauer · Co-sponsored / Sen. Ed Charbonneau · Sponsored / Sen. Liz Brown · Sponsored / Sen. Lonnie Randolph · Sponsored

Reviewed provider-payment provisions

The enrolled HB 1474 digest describes FSSA responsibility for PathWays provider rates and rules for qualifying nursing-facility contracts, monthly denial reports, minimum payments and interest on specified delayed claims. The governor signed the law May 1, 2025. This later legislation did not launch PathWays, which began July 1, 2024. Signing does not establish that claims were paid or health outcomes improved.

Signed May 1, 2025. Selected provider-payment duties are described in the official enrolled digest; provision-specific effective dates and later administration require separate review.

Why this record is included

The enrolled HB 1474 digest describes FSSA responsibility for PathWays provider rates and rules for qualifying nursing-facility contracts, monthly denial reports, minimum payments and interest on specified delayed claims. The governor signed the law May 1, 2025. This later legislation did not launch PathWays, which began July 1, 2024. Signing does not establish that claims were paid or health outcomes improved.

Retained Indiana evidence context: Health · reviewed policy context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Requires the office of the secretary of family and social services (office of the secretary) to determine the base reimbursement rate structure, methodology, and reimbursement rates for provider payment by managed care organizations under the program.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Indiana Legislature · SB 2

Medicaid matters.

May 1, 2025 · Enacted · Public Law 126

Rep. Brad Barrett · Sponsored / Sen. Ed Charbonneau · Sponsored / Sen. Ryan Mishler · Sponsored / Sen. Chris Garten · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The law requires eligibility checks and redeterminations and establishes standards and corrective actions for hospital presumptive-eligibility determinations. These provisions concern entry into and continuation of Medicaid coverage.

The Indiana legislative record shows the measure was enacted on May 1, 2025 as Public Law 126.

Why this record is included

The law requires eligibility checks and redeterminations and establishes standards and corrective actions for hospital presumptive-eligibility determinations. These provisions concern entry into and continuation of Medicaid coverage. The fact measures whether residents under 65 have coverage, rather than the number of services covered or used.

Retained Indiana evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

The law requires eligibility checks and redeterminations and establishes standards and corrective actions for hospital presumptive-eligibility determinations. These provisions concern entry into and continuation of Medicaid coverage.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Indiana Legislature · HB 1513

FSSA matters.

May 4, 2023 · Enacted · Public Law 241

Rep. Brad Barrett · Sponsored / Sen. Ed Charbonneau · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The law permits enrollment fees, premiums or similar charges as conditions of eligibility for the Healthy Indiana Plan and CHIP. Its other changes to service copayments and agency administration are separate.

The Indiana legislative record shows the measure was enacted on May 4, 2023 as Public Law 241.

Why this record is included

The law permits enrollment fees, premiums or similar charges as conditions of eligibility for the Healthy Indiana Plan and CHIP. Its other changes to service copayments and agency administration are separate. The fact measures whether residents under 65 have coverage, rather than the number of services covered or used.

Retained Indiana evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

The law permits enrollment fees, premiums or similar charges as conditions of eligibility for the Healthy Indiana Plan and CHIP. Its other changes to service copayments and agency administration are separate.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Chris Jeter

Indiana House of Representatives, District 88 · R–IN

2 proposals
View proposals from Rep. Chris Jeter
Indiana Legislature · SB 148

Indiana crime guns task force.

Mar 4, 2026 · Enacted · Public Law 70

Rep. Chris Jeter · Sponsored / Sen. Rodney Pol · Sponsored / Sen. Mike Bohacek · Sponsored / Sen. Aaron Freeman · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The law adds LaPorte and Porter counties to the Indiana crime guns task force area beginning July 1, 2027. The relationship concerns the geographic expansion of the task force; the bill also changes quorum rules.

The Indiana legislative record shows the measure was enacted on March 4, 2026 as Public Law 70.

Why this record is included

The law adds LaPorte and Porter counties to the Indiana crime guns task force area beginning July 1, 2027. The relationship concerns the geographic expansion of the task force; the bill also changes quorum rules. The official record directly regulates firearms or addresses shootings, firearm safety, trafficking, or gun-violence prevention. It does not establish an effect on Indiana's firearm mortality rate.

Retained Indiana evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

The law adds LaPorte and Porter counties to the Indiana crime guns task force area beginning July 1, 2027. The relationship concerns the geographic expansion of the task force; the bill also changes quorum rules.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Indiana Legislature · SB 236

Abortion inducing drugs and abortion reports.

Jan 29, 2026 · Did not pass

Rep. J.D. Prescott · Sponsored / Rep. Joanna King · Sponsored / Rep. Garrett Bascom · Sponsored / Rep. Chris Jeter · Sponsored / Sen. Brian Buchanan · Co-sponsored / Sen. Linda Rogers · Co-sponsored / Sen. Blake Doriot · Co-sponsored / Sen. Tyler Johnson · Sponsored / Sen. Liz Brown · Sponsored / Sen. Stacey Donato · Co-sponsored / Sen. Travis Holdman · Co-sponsored / Sen. Mike Gaskill · Co-sponsored / Sen. Scott Alexander · Co-sponsored / Sen. Jeff Raatz · Co-sponsored / Sen. Michael Young · Co-sponsored / Sen. Randy Maxwell · Co-sponsored / Sen. Gary Byrne · Co-sponsored / Sen. James Tomes · Co-sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The proposal would change abortion-related definitions and reporting, require certain reports to reach the inspector general, and create civil liability concerning abortion-inducing drugs.

The official Indiana General Assembly record lists this final action on January 29, 2026: First reading: referred to Committee on Public Health. The measure became inactive when the 2026 session ended.

Why this record is included

The proposal would change abortion-related definitions and reporting, require certain reports to reach the inspector general, and create civil liability concerning abortion-inducing drugs. The fact counts abortions performed in Indiana and reported to the state, rather than all pregnancy outcomes or abortions obtained out of state.

Retained Indiana evidence context: Terminated pregnancies reported. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

The proposal would change abortion-related definitions and reporting, require certain reports to reach the inspector general, and create civil liability concerning abortion-inducing drugs.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Earl Harris

Indiana House of Representatives, District 2 · D–IN

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Earl Harris
Indiana Legislature · HB 1095

Indiana crime guns task force.

Apr 1, 2025 · Enacted · Public Law 16

Rep. Earl Harris · Sponsored / Sen. Dan Dernulc · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The law permits Lake County to join the Indiana crime guns task force, expanding the area served by its firearm-tracing and violent-crime work. It also changes board voting rules.

The Indiana legislative record shows the measure was enacted on April 1, 2025 as Public Law 16.

Why this record is included

The law permits Lake County to join the Indiana crime guns task force, expanding the area served by its firearm-tracing and violent-crime work. It also changes board voting rules. The official record directly regulates firearms or addresses shootings, firearm safety, trafficking, or gun-violence prevention. It does not establish an effect on Indiana's firearm mortality rate.

Retained Indiana evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

The law permits Lake County to join the Indiana crime guns task force, expanding the area served by its firearm-tracing and violent-crime work. It also changes board voting rules.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Indiana officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.

Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Indiana statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 5, 2026.