Though the recent congressional debate over legislation like the Matthew Shepard Act — a law that would expand federal hate crime laws to include crimes against gays, lesbians and transgenders — has put hate crime legislation back into the spotlight, the United States is no stranger to hate crime laws.

The federal government passed laws against hate crimes as early as 1969, and since then, 45 states have followed suit and passed hate crime laws as well.

Indiana is not one of those states. In fact, Indiana is one of just five states that have passed no hate crime legislation to date — and, according to State Rep. Greg Porter, that puts Indiana behind the times.

“It’s a travesty for a state like this to have no bias crime legislation on the books,” he said. “It’s a travesty for this state to fail to protect people.”

According to Porter, a Democrat who represents sections of central Indianapolis, some hate crime legislation was in front of the General Assembly this year, but it was killed shortly after it came out of committee.

Porter also said that this is the third year that he’s presented hate crime legislation to the General Assembly, and that he won’t be stopped from presenting it in the future.

“We will continue to fight for bias crime legislation, because it shows we accept all individuals to our state,” Porter said. “It protects people from all walks of life.”

State Rep. Jackie Walorski, a Republican representing the southern part of St. Joseph and Elkhart counties, disagrees. According to her, hate crime legislation gives certain groups of people additional protection under the law — which is unconstitutional.

“The job of government is to protect people, and the Constitution says that everyone is afforded the same protection,” she said. “I haven’t supported hate crime legislation in the past because I’m not sure we should give some people special rights and others not.”

According to Walorski, who represents District 21, hate crime legislation makes it possible for two people to receive different punishments for the exact same crime simply because the victim of one crime is of a specific race or ethnicity.

“We can’t say that if I get mugged in the streets, then there’s one set of circumstances and penalties, and if someone else gets mugged in the streets, then there’s another altogether,” she said. “I want everyone to feel as safe as everyone else.”

For local legislators, state hate crime legislation is an issue that isn’t easy to clarify.

According to State Rep. Jack Lutz, a Republican who represents cities in Madison County, the decision to support or not support state hate crime legislation would depend on what exactly the bill contained. “Right now, I have no idea what a bill like this would say. I can’t support it without seeing it.”

State Rep. Terri Austin, a Democrat representing Anderson and other areas of Madison County, agreed. “It’s easy to say you support an issue, but it’s more difficult when you consider what the implications of a bill’s provisions might be. You never know what it’s going to look like.”

Austin said she wouldn’t be surprised if hate-crime legislation came before the General Assembly in January, when the state legislature will reconvene.