A push to crack down on abusive dog breeders ran into trouble Monday as lawmakers clashed over a provision that would bar municipalities from imposing tougher restrictions.

That change and others backed by Sen. Brent Steele, R-Bedford, were met with impassioned objections by the bill’s author, Rep. Linda Lawson, D-Hammond, who immediately recessed a House-Senate conference committee after Steele presented his proposal.

Lawson, representing the Democratic majority in the House, and Steele, speaking for the Senate’s GOP majority, must reach a deal on the bill by midnight Wednesday for it to pass this legislative session.

Different versions of the bill passed each chamber, and Lawson has already conceded on several points sought by Republicans, including stripping out a cap on the number of unspayed female dogs that a breeder can keep and how many litters a dog can have in a year.

HB 1468 still would give prosecutors and police greater powers to act against abusive dog owners. Under current law, breeders are required only to provide the animals with food and water. Breeders would be required to let the animals exercise daily and to use solid flooring instead of just wire for cages. The bill also would subject large commercial breeders, called puppy mills by their detractors, to state registration and oversight for the first time.

Lawson said she didn’t know whether she could agree to a bill that would prevent local communities such as Bloomington and Fort Wayne from enforcing their own ordinances.

“There are communities that have much stronger language than this bill is going to have,” she said.

“This is disgraceful. It’s bad public policy.”

Steele disagreed and said he would not budge on his insistence that breeders be subjected to the same requirements across the state.

“It’s a business that can be conducted statewide,” he said, “and I think the laws ought to be uniform statewide.”

Lawson also objected to a change by Steele that would exempt breeders who raise hunting and law enforcement dogs, calling it “absolutely unreasonable.” She said the changes were not about protecting dogs, but about looking out for the interests of breeders.

Craig Curry, with the Indiana Council on Canine Welfare, a group that represents the breeders, attended Monday’s hearing but declined to comment.