Which bills in Â鶹´«Ã½¡¯s 2025 legislative session drew broad support, and which sparked fierce battles that split longtime allies? According to a new authored by Trey Gordner and Colin Moore, analysis of lobbying data reveals patterns of agreement, conflict and coalition-building among the state¡¯s politically active organizations.
Where the conflict is clear
, which would have legalized and regulated sports betting in Â鶹´«Ã½, had seven organizations supporting it, including labor unions and gaming associations. Another seven opposed it, led by religious groups and family advocates. It was one of the most polarizing bills of the year and failed in the session¡¯s final days.
Lobbying conflicts are often framed as battles between major sectors, such as those between healthcare organizations and vice industries. But some of the most revealing moments in state politics happen when an issue divides some organizations within a sector against others. These intra-sectoral splits can expose hidden tensions within a powerful coalition over policy direction, regulatory risk, or political strategy.
The debate over marijuana was one such case. and , companion bills to legalize cannabis and create a new regulatory structure, exposed splits within the health, nonprofit and trade association sectors. Perhaps not surprisingly, private business organizations with a direct stake in legalization such as the Â鶹´«Ã½ Cannabis Industry Association supported legalization based on its potential to create a strong regulatory model and generate increased tax revenue. But more traditional business organizations, such as the Retail Merchants of Â鶹´«Ã½, voiced concerns about its effects on tourism and public health.
Another sharply divided measure was , which allowed electric utilities to recover wildfire mitigation costs through ratepayer surcharges. The bill generated 41 lobbyist positions with some trade associations and labor unions taking opposing positions. Because internal splits among long-standing allies are rare, these divisions offer important insight into how policy debates unfold within established coalitions.
High support, not high drama
Some of the most heavily lobbied bills in the 2025 session were also among the least contested. , a bill to appropriate funds for community-based programs administered by the judiciary, attracted 29 lobbying positions with 28 in support and one comment. Similarly, , which expanded access to school meals, was supported by 26 organizations and faced no opposition. (For comparison, the typical lobbied bill has only three positions.)
This blog uses data to examine lobbying at the bill level, identifying the issues and proposals that united or divided stakeholders. It followed a June 2025 UHERO analysis of which groups drove the state¡¯s policy debates in the 2025 legislative session.
See the for insights on quietly contested bills, unusual coalition pairings and lobbying trends beyond the headlines.
UHERO is housed in UH ²Ñā²Ô´Ç²¹¡¯²õ .