Indiana lawmakers and Gov. Braun just increased the speed limit on I-465
The ten mile-per-hour increase was part of a large road funding bill that Gov. Mike Braun signed into law the evening of May 1.
The increase did not appear in the original legislation and did not prompt much discussion during the legislative session. House Bill 1461, now House Enrolled Act 1461, dealt more prominently with other road subjects, like tolling and the Community Crossings grant program.
The Senate added language about I-465 while the bill was working its way through that chamber, and the bill author, Republican Rep. Jim Pressel of Rolling Prairie, agreed with the changes.
Many Hoosiers have long felt the 55 miles-per-hour speed limit was too low. A few years ago, the Indiana Department of Transportation measured drivers' speeds at a northwest section of the interstate for 13 days and found that 96% were going over the speed limit.
From 2021: Why the speed limit on I-465 is only 55 mph despite most people driving faster
When Pressel presented the final version of the bill on the House floor on April 17, he acknowledged that reality and elicited some chuckles from his colleagues.
"This is really not anything to do with road funding, but I like it," he said. "For those of us who struggle driving 55 miles an hour on 465, it increases the speed limit to 65. There you go."
Drivers should remain vigilant about lower speed limits in work zones, such as in the I-465/I-69 construction zone on the northeast side.
More: That lead foot could land a fine in your mailbox as INDOT launches speed control program
Beginning May 5, there will be penalties for exceeding 11 miles per hour over the posted speed limit in those work zones. That came from another Indiana bill, passed in 2023, that enabled INDOT to pilot speed camera programs in work zones.
Contact IndyStar state government and politics reporter Kayla Dwyer at kdwyer@indystar.com or follow her on X@kayla_dwyer17.
Sign up for our free weekly politics newsletter,Checks & Balances, curated by IndyStar political and government reporters.
This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: The speed limit on I-465 is now higher thanks to this Indiana law
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
an hour ago
- Chicago Tribune
Elon Musk forms new political party after split with Trump over president's signature tax cuts law
BRIDGEWATER, N.J. — Elon Musk said he's carrying out his threat to form a new political party after his fissure with President Donald Trump, announcing the America Party in response to the president's sweeping tax cuts law. Musk, once an ever-present ally to Trump as he headed up the slashing agency known as the Department of Government Efficiency, broke with the Republican president over his signature legislation, which was signed into law Friday. As the bill made its way through Congress, Musk threatened to form the 'America Party' if 'this insane spending bill passes.' 'When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy,' Musk said Saturday on X, the social media company he owns. 'Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.' The formation of new political parties is not uncommon, but they typically struggle to pull any significant support away from the Republican and Democratic parties. But Musk, the world's richest man who spent at least $250 million supporting Trump in the 2024 election, could impact the 2026 elections determining control of Congress if he is willing to spend significant amounts of money. His reignited feud with the president could also be costly for Musk, whose businesses rely on billions of dollars in government contracts and publicly traded company Tesla has taken a hit in the market. It wasn't clear whether Musk had taken steps to formally create the new political party. Spokespeople for Musk and his political action committee, America PAC, didn't immediately comment Sunday. As of Sunday morning, there were multiple political parties listed in the Federal Election Commission database that had been formed in the the hours since Musk's Saturday X post with versions of 'America Party' of 'DOGE' or 'X' in the name, or Musk listed among people affiliated with the entity. But none appeared to be authentic, listing contacts for the organization as email addresses such as 'wentsnowboarding@ or untraceable Protonmail addresses. Musk on Sunday spent the morning on X taking feedback from users about the party and indicated he'd use the party to get involved in the 2026 midterm elections. Last month, he threatened to try to oust every member of Congress that voted for Trump's bill. Musk had called the tax breaks and spending cuts package a 'disgusting abomination,' warning it would increase the federal deficit, among other critiques. 'The Republican Party has a clean sweep of the executive, legislative and judicial branches and STILL had the nerve to massively increase the size of government, expanding the national debt by a record FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS,' Musk said Sunday on X. His critiques of the bill and move to form a political party mark a reversal from May, when his time in the White House was winding down and the head of rocket company SpaceX and electric vehicle maker Tesla said he would spend 'a lot less' on politics in the future. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who clashed with Musk while he ran DOGE, said on CNN's 'State of the Union' on Sunday that DOGE's 'principles' were popular but 'if you look at the polling, Elon was not.' 'I imagine that those board of directors did not like this announcement yesterday and will be encouraging him to focus on his business activities, not his political activities,' he said.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
For the sake of his party and country, Schumer should step aside
Halfway through 2025, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is the embodiment of the kind of leader that his party's base clearly does not want. A new Reuters-Ipsos poll found that 62 percent of self-identified Democrats agreed that 'the leadership of the Democratic Party should be replaced with new people.' And key findings from that survey indicate that Schumer is the party's most out-of-step leader. The poll showed that a large majority of Democrats want elected officials to reduce 'corporate influence,' while a whopping 86 percent 'said changing the federal tax code so wealthy Americans and large corporations pay more in taxes should be a priority.' But Schumer's record is the epitome of corporate influence. For decades, he has given priority to protecting the financial interests of the wealthy and of large corporations. Schumer vowed not to step aside after he infuriated the vast bulk of congressional Democrats with his vote for President Trump's spending bill in March. That vote also incensed grassroots Democrats across the country, to the point that he felt compelled to abruptly call off an imminent, long-planned publicity tour for his new book that month. In effect, Schumer has become persona non grata among his party's voters in many blue states. More than three months after his 'postponed' book tour, it has not been rescheduled — the Senate's top Democrat is evidently wary of photo ops of protests against him by Democrats around the country. He remains the top Democrat in the Senate at a time when he is deeply unpopular among voters eager for leadership to put up a fight against the Trump administration. If Senate Democrats are serious about reversing their party's tailspin and improving its public image, they should insist on ending Schumer's stint as minority leader. It is time for Democratic colleagues to put their foot down instead of deferring to New York's senior senator. Schumer's behavior stands in sharp contrast to the example set by Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). When Democrats lost control of the House in January 2023, causing Pelosi to lose the Speaker's gavel, she could have taken the post of minority leader but instead chose to step aside. But when Democrats lost control of the Senate in early January of this year, dislodging Schumer as majority leader, he chose to become minority leader. Now, by clinging to that post, Schumer is damaging the party's ability to rebound from its setbacks last fall and its current abysmal approval ratings. Schumer's unwelcome nickname — 'the senator from Wall Street' — is longstanding and well-earned. He reached new heights as corporate America's champion on Capitol Hill during the 2008 financial crisis, when he 'became one of the first officials to promote a Wall Street bailout,' as reported by The New York Times. Schumer was playing 'an unrivaled role in Washington as beneficiary, advocate and overseer of an industry that is his hometown's most important business.' By fall 2009, more than 15 percent of the year's contributions from Wall Street to all senators had gone to Schumer himself. Schumer has since remained closely aligned with the very corporate interests that most Democratic voters don't want party leaders to serve. Meanwhile, sectors such as banking, real estate, finance and the tobacco industry have sent floods of appreciative donations into Schumer's campaign coffers. At the end of 2024, Schumer's campaign committee reported a six-year donor haul of nearly $43 million. More than one-quarter of that total came just from securities and investment companies, real estate interests, law firms and lawyers. While those patrons and other major backers are presumably happy with Schumer's capacity to sway legislation, many of his own constituents want him out of Senate leadership. A Marist poll in April found that 53 percent of New Yorkers think he should relinquish his minority leader position. Here is how the grassroots pro-Democratic group Pass the Torch described him earlier this year: 'Chuck Schumer is unwilling and unable to meet the moment. His sole job is to fight MAGA's fascist takeover of our democracy — instead, he's directly enabling it. Americans desperately need a real opposition party to stand up to Trump.' Schumer is the most powerful symbol of how the current Democratic Party has lost touch with its base of voters who will be crucial for making gains in the midterm election next year and recapturing the White House in 2028. Continuing to enshrine him as the biggest spokesperson for Senate Democrats is a way of telling voters that catering to the personal ambition of a timeworn politician is a higher priority than being responsive to the party's constituents. Every two years, we hear how the results of federal elections will hinge on turnout. Yet the fact that Schumer remains entrenched as the top Democrat in the Senate indicates that the party is willing to depress its voter turnout rather than shake up its power structure in Congress. As long as the likes of Schumer are running the Democratic show on Capitol Hill, the party of Trump has little to worry about. Norman Solomon is cofounder of RootsAction and executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. His book 'War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine' was published in 2023.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Republicans just cut Medicaid. Will it cost them control of Congress?
'The other side is going to use Medicaid as an issue,' he said, even as he voted for the megabill. 'And I think the Senate [version of the bill] gives them a little more leverage to do so.' Republicans are walking a tightrope as they return to their districts to start selling the sweeping policy package. They're going to lean into the megabill's popular provisions, like eliminating taxes on tips, while trying to escape unpopular reductions to safety-net programs. The final bill slashes spending by $1.7 trillion. Voters broadly dislike the megabill; some recent polling shows a 2-to-1 margin of disapproval, according to surveys conducted by Quinnipiac University , The Washington Post , Pew Research and Fox News . Nearly half of voters want more federal funding for Medicaid, while just 10 percent want less, according to Quinnipiac. 'What we know from past elections is that messing with people's healthcare coverage is very problematic for politicians. And it has, in the past, yielded some very, very negative views about the people who supported it,' said Republican pollster Whit Ayres. Meanwhile Democrats are rushing to capitalize on the controversy and plan to make it a centerpiece of their midterm messaging . House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries spoke on the floor for eight hours and 45 minutes, reading letters from constituents of vulnerable GOP lawmakers who could lose access to both programs. Democratic candidates followed up with post-vote statements blasting the Republicans they're looking to unseat for effectively kicking people in their districts off their health care plans. Their campaign arms and allied super PACs have already released several rounds of ads hammering vulnerable Republicans and say they plan to keep up the pace. Republicans are trying to figure out how to fight back. Their early salvos have focused on painting Democrats as supportive of tax hikes since they opposed a bill that would extend Trump's 2017 tax cuts and eliminate federal taxes on tips and overtime. Republicans also argue they're protecting the 'most vulnerable' Medicaid recipients by removing undocumented immigrants and others they say shouldn't have access to the program anyway. But in a tacit acknowledgment of the potential electoral fallout, some Republicans have pledged to try to reverse provisions such as the provider tax drawdown before they take effect in 2028. 'To the extent that there's reform, and … you can legitimately argue it's the waste, fraud, abuse, that's a good position to be in,' said Rep. Russ Fulcher (R-Idaho). 'If it's just strictly a situation where you say, 'We're just cutting and spending' and it's not cognizant as to how and where, that's where we get into trouble.'
