Attempts to introduce an online lottery in Indiana have fallen through after a proposed bill failed to raise enough support.
HB 1078 found its way to the House once again after the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Ethan Manning, made a similar proposal in 2025. However, due to be discussed on 20 January, the draft was removed from the agenda shortly before the House session.
Speaking to the Indiana Capital Chronicle, Manning cited a lack of support which drove his last-minute decision: “It didn’t have enough support, really, from either caucus on the concept.
“I don’t think I could have changed one word in the bill to gain any more votes. It’s just the idea itself. We’re clearly not ready, as a Legislature, to move any further on any forms of online gambling.”
Similar to the 2025 version, Manning and several other policymakers bundled a provision within the latest bill which would’ve legalised iGaming alongside iLottery, with the argument that online gambling is already taking place in Indiana – just not under the control or for the benefit of the state.
These amendments were subsequently rejected with no votes during a 13 January session, with opponents citing the state House rule where “no motion or proposition on a subject not germane to that under consideration shall be admitted under color of an amendment”.
A change in the now-pulled bill which did manage to win committee backing would’ve introduced incentives for participating retailers to promote digital lottery games.
Had the bill been approved, this aspect of it would have created additional provisions in place to ensure that retail sales are not negatively impacted by their digital counterparts.
Regardless, SBC Americas said Manning has now seemingly given up trying to push the bill again during this legislative session, adding that Indiana’s overall success of being one of the first states to legalise sports betting in 2019 could have played a role in the plateauing adoption of new legislations.
“Sports wagering, having gone so early and Indiana being one of the earliest states to do that, I think that’s hurt our argument for further forms of online gaming, because a lot of members don’t like the impacts,” he concluded. “They don’t like seeing advertisements and those sorts of things.”