The death of the Fishers teens sparks change.

Candidates for Indiana's primary elections are lined up and the BMV alters gender roles from the television studios at WFYI Public Media.

It's Indiana Week in Review for the week ending February 13th, 2026.

Indiana Week in Review is produced by WFYI in association with Indiana Public Broadcasting stations.

Additional support is provided by ParrRichey.

The recent disappearance and death of Fishers teen Hailey Buzbee has prompted Indiana lawmakers to move legislation and try to strengthen ways to address missing children.

Ben Thorp reports one change would impact the state's Amber Alert system.

The update to the state's Amber Alert system would allow it to be used in instances like Buzbee's, where law enforcement believes the missing person is a high risk.

The amendment isn't the Pink Alert system some advocates had been asking for.

House Speaker Todd Huston says lawmakers will study the issue over the summer, but are worried about too many alerts going out, rendering them meaningless.

You know, you don't want to have so many alerts that they become on impactful or that people aren't aware what they should and shouldn't be looking for.

And another amendment revives parental permission around social media use for teens.

The two amendments have the support of Buzbee's parents.

Will changes to the alert system help keep children safe?

It's the first question for our Indiana Week in Review panel.

Democrat Terri Austin, Republican Whitley Yates, Jon Schwantes, host of Indiana Lawmakers.

And Ebony Chapel, Director of Brand and Community Strategy at Free Press Indiana.

I'm Jill Sheridan, managing editor at WFYI.

So, Terri, we're lawmakers obligated to try and adjust the current system.

Well, there's been a long standing concern about the number of alerts that continue to be issued.

And this was a tragic situation.

There's, you know, no way to categorize it otherwise.

But but the problem is people are so inundated with sensory, you know, alerts, ads, music, noise that a lot of times you just tune them out and they they want something that's effective.

Effective.

So I mean, Whitley do you think?

You know, this is more about the social media language that's in this legislation.

And that concern as we are, you know, fully into the 21st century, and this is what's surrounding you.

I definitely think that social media has played a large role in the way in which predators are going after the youth.

And I think that looking into ways to mitigate that is important.

The greatest, I believe intervention is prevention.

and I'm not saying that the Amber Alert system would not have helped.

I'm not sure how it would have helped in this timeline situation, but I do think monitoring what your children are doing online and making sure that they're not engaging with predators is really incumbent in social media, has been pushing through the algorithms and through a lot of the apps, some of the detrimental content for the youth.

I mean, lawmakers have said that this is a way, Jon, for law enforcement to be able to act more quickly.

And it does seem, as we are in a more fast paced environment, that that is crucial.

when we're considering missing children.

Oh, sure.

I don't think there's anyone who doesn't want to see law enforcement and society as a whole acting quickly when one of our cherished youth, goes missing or is in harm's way.

that I think there's no party labels that need to be applied.

No, you know, conservative liberal.

You can see the pain on the part of her parents.

it's not often that testimony brings tears to the eyes of lawmakers, but I think it was clear that this did.

So it's moving and and there's no Terri.

You said there's no way to categorize it as anything other than a tragedy.

And that's exactly right.

So we're left, then, with lawmakers struggling to figure out the best way, from a policy standpoint, to respond.

And you don't want to make a situation worse where there is people become jaded or, immune to the notion of, you know, the sky is falling.

How many times do you have to hear it before you stop listening?

I don't know the answer.

but it's a critically important issue, reminding us all, once again, the fragility of life and that there is a real nexus between real life, real challenges with Hoosiers and the work of 150 members of the General Assembly.

Sometimes we, I think, forget that.

we did see great bipartisan support for doing trying to do something at the statehouse about this issue.

But the proposals, the proposals that lawmakers are trying, you know, would they have made a difference in this case?

It's hard to say.

What I will say is that I wish we were talking about Hailey Buzbee for a different reason.

this young woman I learned through a story written by the Indy Star wanted to be a journalist.

She was a part of her school news program.

That is why we should be.

Knowing her name is because of that work.

Not because, she was, you know, the victim of a tragedy that we're still, the layers of, I think, where the most meat lies.

And I think we all kind of align on this is through, more regulation.

We found a way to age, restrict and then ban websites like Pornhub.

We found a way to be in that.

So I think that there's a way that we can intervene.

she met the person that is, being questioned right now that led police to her.

Remains on a gaming website.

So what can we do to regulate these websites, regulate social media, inform parents more thoroughly about the topic of grooming?

Right now, I think we are experiencing a layer of generational divide.

It's always been the case that teenagers didn't tell their parents everything they had going on in their inner world.

That has been the case forever.

However, now we are at a really crucial time where you could be sitting right next to your child, have no idea what's going on in their life, have no idea what's going on in their phone.

So we need to have more widespread education for parents, as well as teens to inform them about some of the tactics that exist out there.

So that's what I would like to see more energy around.

I agree with Speaker Huston.

I think too many alerts it just in one area after other people start to become desensitized.

and she Hailey is just the the latest in a long line of young people that have gone missing in our community.

So it's time that we really step up and do something serious about it.

Terri, does it really fall on on families then to, you know, have these difficult conversations and understand what children are doing?

I think it's a shared responsibility.

Parents, first and foremost, are the gatekeepers for their children.

And, you know, a lot of times, parents themselves don't know how to utilize the tools that may be available to them through programs, whether it's TikTok, Facebook, whatever.

and parents are, you know, busy a lot of times with their own lives and they're not necessarily tuned in to some of those, you know, lower level issues.

But at the General Assembly also has a responsibility, I think, to say, are there things that we can enact statewide that will help prevent this type of event from happening again?

We're going to have something that lawmakers have said that they will consider in a summer of study committee is something that we should be looking deeply into.

Absolutely.

And I don't think that anyone, regardless of political divide, wants to see these types of situations consistently happen within the state.

So everyone, whether that's parents, whether that's teachers, lawmakers, and those that are in big Tech should be looking at ways to mitigate and reduce the harm done to children and youth.

Well, it's time now for viewer feedback.

Each week we pose an unscientific online poll question.

This week's question what moves should the state take to better protect youth?

Answer a expand Amber Alerts b create a new alert system or c tighten social media usage.

The last question posed to viewers Should Indiana students be allowed to walk out for organized protests?

87% saying yes and 13% saying no.

If you would like to take part in the poll.

Go to WFYI.org/IWIR and look for the poll.

The field is set for Indiana's upcoming primary election.

This year, all U.S.

House seats and all Indiana House seats and half of the Senate seats will be on ballots.

Eric Weddle has more.

Indiana's primary election is set for Tuesday, May 5th.

Voters will head to polls to choose Democrat and Republican candidates for Congress.

The state legislature and local offices.

But three major statewide races will be missing from your primary ballot.

November election candidates for Secretary of State, State Comptroller and Treasurer are instead chosen by delegates at party conventions later this summer.

If you are not registered to vote yet, the deadline is April 6th.

You can find a full list of who is running in the main primary on our website.

So Whitley, will.

President Trump's threat to back alternative Republican candidates after redistricting this year really come through?

I mean, I don't think it's a threat anymore.

I think it's a promise.

If you look at who has been primaried and who's being primary now, the Republicans, every single one that voted against redistricting has a primary challenger.

Now.

Promises made, promises kept.

But will they be able to overcome the incumbent Republicans?

That's a little tricky, because I do think with Indiana being a super majority Republican state, a lot of the Republicans have deep ties within their constituency.

And I do think if you do not like the way in which are represented, that you should run for office or vote out the people that are representing you to have better representation.

But will they be able to beat the incumbent advantage?

I wouldn't put my money there.

And Terri, also hearing from Democrats around the state saying that you know, record numbers of Democrats are going to be running in this primary election and elections overall in 2026.

What do you make of that?

Well, I think people are very engaged.

They're interested.

They've decided that you cannot just sit on the sidelines and hope things are going to change or get better.

And I am thrilled to death to see so many people step forward.

A lot of young people are coming forward, and people with a what we need are people with integrity to run on both sides.

Jon, what race are you really excited about this year?

Well, certainly, they're all going to be interesting.

I mean, because we have so many factors at work here, there's the several storylines, let's say the storyline about will Donald Trump be able to, you know, extract, some sense of retribution?

I don't think he will.

I think the candidates are there, as has been pointed out.

Some of them may have some backing and funding, but I think, even among primary candidates and of course, we it's the old familiar story.

Primary candidates and both sides tend to be favored by the most zealous wings of their, their parties, whether that's the liberal side or the most conservative side.

But because of the tentacles and the relationships that Whitley referred to that exist for these lawmakers, I think some of them will use it as a badge of honor that they stood up for what they see as Hoosier values and fairness and the rule of law.

We didn't kowtow, we didn't cave to pressure.

So it will actually, be a good one.

That's one it'll be interesting to see.

you know, some of the we talk about legislative races, but also JD Ford's can't, you know, entry into, perhaps federal, or the federal arena running for Congress.

That's that's an interesting one to watch.

we don't have, the Senate President pro tem up this cycle.

So that would be the ultimate test of, of of the notion of, the referendum on Trump power.

Right?

and a few of the other, most visible members of, of the anti redistricting movement.

So we don't have that.

We'll see that how that unfolds in two years.

But, a lot, a lot of for voters to chew on.

And here locally as well in Indianapolis Jon mentioned district five.

But district seven should be interesting as well for, Andre Carson, long time, congressional representative here in the state facing, number of challengers in the primary.

Crowded.

It's a little.

Crowded.

yet to everyone's point, I'm much less worried about, the president's, you know, threats now promises.

what I am most concerned about is calls from him for the White House to run state elections.

Most most concerned about that.

So I think that's something that we really need to pay attention to.

and make sure that people who are in charge of ensuring fair and safe elections are equipped to do exactly that.

I am interested to see how things work out.

locally.

Really interesting.

I mean, not many lawmakers did respond to that bill saying, you know, we do not support that.

When Trump called for, for elections as as of any mentioned, we've also seen, a number of independents.

Last week we talked about Ed Clere who'll be running now as an independent, a mayoral race.

But do you think we'll see more, independent candidates in Indiana?

Terri?

I think it'll be a while.

I mean, we may see an uptick in some respects, but I think it's going to be a long time before we really see a strong, viable, either independent or libertarian party.

it's it just seems that people are falling into camps, although, interestingly enough, more than more than a third of all voters now categorize themselves as independents.

That is interesting.

It is interesting.

And I will also say that you're seeing more women of color running for office on both sides of the aisle.

You've got Alissa Impink who is running to take Andrea Hunley that she's no longer running for.

You've got Roni Ford, running on the right on the Republican side, both beautiful, intelligent black women, running for state House.

So I think either way it goes, seeing the invigoration and excitement around new leaders entering the field is a good thing.

Well, Indiana residents will no longer be able to change their gender marker on driver's license.

Zak Cassel reports that a new Bureau of Motor Vehicles rule took effect this week.

Indiana has let people change their gender marker on driver's licenses for years.

The ban was proposed last year.

At a hearing last November, most, if not all testimony it opposed the move.

Advocates found out about the change over the weekend.

Emma Vosicky is with GenderNexus.

There are an incredible number of people who are going to be hurt.

The state can't even find the integrity to say, hey, there are people are going to be hurt.

In a statement, the BMV says it published a notice about the rule change online on February 3rd.

It says it considered all public comments and that the rule complies with governor Mike Braun's executive order on sex and gender.

So Ebony, why make this change so quickly and quietly?

Well, you know, there are a few different ways that you could look at this.

Whether it was intentional on the part of the BMV who received the order and information on January 13th, they didn't publish it until February 3rd.

Whether it was intentional or it was a case of somebody doing their job extremely poorly and waiting until the last minute.

I will let the people decide what it is that they think about that.

what I do think is the bigger issue with this is the fact that our state government will waste time, energy, resources on something so mundane, so superficial as what letters someone has on a flimsy piece of plastic.

I think it's important that voters pay attention to these things.

when we go into election cycles and decide whether or not that is the type of government they want, do you want a government that cares more about something that, frankly, does not impact a person's?

If it's not your issue, it doesn't impact your quality of life.

Either way, would you rather have a government that is fully invested in that, or one that is fully invested in making sure you have a living wage?

You have health care, you have childcare, addressed, which is a major issue.

So that is my biggest focus when it comes to this.

So how wasteful.

That's the same way as well, Jon.

You know, again, the government in Indiana focusing on sexual identity.

Well, I've pointed this out before, but I'll say it again because I find it it's important.

My three kids, all born in Marion County, St.

Vincent Hospital, none of them has a gender notation on his or her birth certificate.

They.

Marion County did not do that.

And I presume other Indiana states, I don't know what I is on my Marion County birth certificate because I have to find the stone tablet it was on, but and examined it closely.

But there are a lot of Hoosiers who don't have if this whole thing is going to be dependent on an M or an F, next to your, you're going to have to scrounge something up other than a birth certificate.

That's neither here nor there.

The other point on this, it seems interesting that the General Assembly is quite willing to let an agency make a decision of this import when if you look at other agencies, Alcoholic Beverage Commission, Hoosier Lottery, which wanted to on its own to do an online lottery, everything else, it seems the General Assembly doesn't like it when agencies.

Well, I did another example environmental management.

Don't be out there making crazy decisions.

This is our purview.

I don't hear anybody complaining that this was done at an agency level or rule at the decision.

decision making at the agency level.

So there's a bit of interesting tonal change going.

The rule of the governor when.

The executive order said, you got to clear up the.

Yeah, we're not using a modern gender, the ideology or whatever words it is that he use.

So they're following the rule is coming down from the top.

Yeah, that's what we heard, Terri, that, you know, we're just following the rules.

We're doing what we were told.

but kind of ignoring, you know, thousands of people that, you know, did take time to say, I object to this.

And.

Well.

And how are they?

My question is going to be, how are you going to clean up what's already out there?

I mean, eventually you'll get to it.

But are people going to be required to come in in mass within a certain deadline to change their driver's license to comply with this?

That's that's a hardship for people.

And again, it's an it's a huge waste of state tax dollars when we have so many other needs that need that should be addressed.

Affordability issues, utilities all of those.

And and what about Whitley the, you know, Hoosiers that won't show up to the BMV and be very surprised and maybe even, you know, hurt when they come across this rule.

I mean, I think that people are going to be empathetic in how this makes them feel.

But I think to say that it was done quietly is a little disingenuous.

When you had the governor, he had a press conference back in March.

WFYI has been reporting on this since June, and then the BMV held, you know, hours worth of public testimony.

And so there was a lot of public input.

And I think the governor's wishes is what prevailed, which should not be a surprise to anyone.

but it is to make sure that the biological gender you're born with is on your ID.

And I think, honestly, after seeing some of the stories, within the prison system and some of the issues that they're having with some of the prisoners getting pregnant from some of these issues, I think that they just want to make sure that people are going to be safe in spaces that should be designated, let's say, in an all women's prison.

I mean, we did hear about Jon from people, you know, that were concerned about that specifically, and we did hear all the testimony as well.

And many people tried to make their voices heard.

Yeah, no doubt about that.

Clearly, there was an effort, to make sure that that those viewpoints were heard during the rulemaking, the promulgation process.

and I'm not suggesting this.

This came out of nowhere.

Clearly, it came from the executive order from the governor.

But, I'm not sure that the agency rulemaking process, it, by definition, is dependent upon an executive order, even though that is the the titular head of the executive branch.

I mean, you could I I'm not the attorney here, but I don't think even with an executive order, you can up end unilaterally and arbitrarily all of the promulgated rules in Indiana's administrative code.

I don't think I would defer to my friends on the Supreme Court to tell me.

Quite a bit of that.

Well, a bill to change Indiana's hemp regulations could kill a growing industry, according to some small businesses that testified at the statehouse this week.

Ben Thorp reports on the attempt to close a loophole.

Lawmakers say the loophole arose in the 2018 farm bill, which they say was intended to approve industrial hemp and CBD products.

With it has come a wide range of synthetic and unregulated products that have higher levels of THC.

Bill author Aaron Freeman says that has led to stores selling products that can get people high.

It is egregious to me that my kid can walk in a gas station and buy this stuff.

Makes no sense whatsoever.

The bill creates a regulatory and licensing structure for products that would still be legal under the new definition, and limits the purchase of products to people 21 and up.

So, Jon, will Indiana ever join the cannabis bandwagon?

I suppose at some point.

we'll see it align more closely with policies in other states.

But I, to be honest, I don't think there's as much of a drumbeat now or momentum as there might have been even a few years ago, in part because people have other avenues to secure the the products that they they want legally and in surrounding states and so forth.

And as an example of what I'm saying, you look at the state Democratic Party wasn't that many years ago, 3 or 4, where the chair and others said our our priorities for the state of Indiana are marijuana reform, marijuana reform, marijuana reform, taking off on the old real estate law.

You know.

Right?

Right.

Location, location, location.

That was the that was priority one, two and three.

I think if you ask the party now, they'd say it's affordability.

It's it's our families getting by and able to put food on the table and able to find adequate shelter and opportunities for their kids to thrive and learn.

I don't see marijuana legalization or cannabis reform.

it's inevitable.

Probably.

But I don't see anybody, you know, storming the Bastille or the statehouse demanding action yesterday.

Well, this legislation legislation also includes, language that, you know, if federal legalization happens, Indiana still has, like, you know, the ability to say, no, no, but we are, you know, missing out on some money.

We're missing out on lots of money.

And that's been studied and researched, time and time again, I think as long as we have, leaders in state government that desire to be lockstep with what's coming out of the White House, we won't have cannabis legislation that makes sense.

We won't have a comprehensive, plan around it.

I do think that it makes sense for lawmakers eventually to get out of their Sunday school bubbles when it comes to this.

It makes no sense that we're missing out on this.

You have Indiana license plates all up and through Illinois and wherever else you know Michigan.

You can procure products.

This is something that it's beyond time for us to have a real solid plan around.

Even the comment about, I don't want my kids to be able to go into a gas station and purchase this.

So regulate it the same way that alcohol is regulated.

Why not build an infrastructure that prevents that from even happening?

And real quick, Whitley, I mean, what about the small businesses that have said, you know, this is this is important to us.

If we're going to be honest, a state that is looking to increase its economic viability.

We are the only state, every single state that touches us has some form of legalization.

I think it's incumbent upon Republicans to look at this as an economic development piece for the state.

I think it's also incumbent of them to look at it from an industry perspective.

For farmers are so many studies of how it helps increase crops.

And then when we're talking about the regulation of it, I think that there's also a piece of social justice that comes in when black communities have been ravaged and placed into jail for this type of crime.

That is now legal in over 30 plus states.

And then the cherry on top of the cake is Trump saying that he is going to reclassify marijuana.

and so Indiana, who seems to want to be in step with Trump, would be incumbent to create laws that.

That's Indiana Week in Review for this week.

Our panel has been Democrat Terri Austin, Republican Whitley Yates, Jon Schwantes, host of Indiana Lawmakers, and Ebony Chapel, Director of Brand and Community Strategy at Free Press Indiana.

You can find Indiana Week in Review, podcast and episodes at WFYI.org/IWIR or on the PBS app.

I'm Jill Sheridan, managing editor at WFYI.

Join us next time because a lot can happen in Indiana week.

The views expressed are solely those of the panelists.

Indiana Week in Review is produced by WFYI in association with Indiana Public Broadcasting Stations.

Additional support is provided by ParrRichey.