Lincoln--Today, Attorney General Mike Hilgers announced his office’s expansion of its fight against illegal or unlawful synthetic THC, by issuing cease &amp; desist letters relating to 104 retail locations and franchised stores in Omaha, Nebraska, that are selling illegal or unlawful THC-containing products.

In 2025, Douglas County Sheriff’s Office and Nebraska Attorney General’s Office investigators&nbsp;made purchases of products from stores owned by 35 different companies. Each store investigated had at least one product marketed as hemp, which actually had a delta-9 concentration over the legal limit, making it marijuana, and had labels that incorrectly identified the content of the products.

The letters issued to the Omaha stores communicate that many&nbsp;of the THC-containing products their company sells misrepresent the concentrations and types of THC contained within those products. This lack of proper labeling means that the stores are engaging in deceptive, unfair, and unsafe trade practices, and also engaging in illegal conduct.

The Attorney General’s Office is sending formal letters to each of the stores, requesting they immediately cease all sales of THC-containing products to Nebraska Consumers to avoid litigation.&nbsp;The Attorney General’s Office is demanding that each store return a signed document indicating their Assurance of Voluntary Compliance. If they do not return a signed settlement, then the office will initiate litigation and will seek penalties and fees to the fullest extent allowed by law.

“We promised that we would escalate our fight, and today are fulfilling that promise. Operating in Nebraska’s largest city does not immunize you from the law. These stores are selling harmful and unlawful products despite being on notice. Because of that, once litigation ensues, we will seek penalties to the fullest extent of the law, and will refer for criminal prosecution when necessary,”&nbsp;stated Attorney General Mike Hilgers.

"I am proud to join Attorney General Hilgers in his efforts. Synthetic THC products are putting a strain on our law enforcement resources and efforts statewide and hurting innocent people who&nbsp;think they are buying a safe and legal&nbsp;product. It is time for the Legislature to step up and clarify that synthetic THC products are not legal in Nebraska,” stated Douglas County Sheriff Aaron Hanson.

Many of the stores have tobacco licenses and also sell synthetically produced THC-containing products, which may put their tobacco licenses at risk.

In addition, as part of the investigation, the Attorney General’s Office uncovered the sale of marijuana. Sale of marijuana is a felony, and the Attorney General’s Office will provide the evidence to the Douglas County Attorney for consideration of criminal charges. Names of products include: Kushy Exotic THCA Flower, Flying Horse Vape-9G, and Road Trip Gummies.

Attorney General Hilgers was also joined by Senators Kauth and Storm at the press conference. He indicated: “We appreciate Senator Kauth and Senator Storm leading the way in helping provide protections for Nebraskans with their support of&nbsp;LB316."

Senator Kauth introduced LB316, and it was prioritized by Senator Storm. It is designed to stop the influx of dangerous products masquerading as hemp and clean up the illegal marketplace that has developed in Nebraska.

To date, the Attorney General’s Office has filed 15 lawsuits alleging violations of the Consumer Protection Act (Unfairness), Consumer Protection Act (Deception), and Nebraska Pure Food Act. The Attorney General reported that 12 out of 15 of the lawsuits have been settled. The remaining three are being actively litigated.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/11/1731528536578.jpeg" alt=" " />
 <figcaption> </figcaption>
 </figure>Attorney General Mike HilgersLincoln--Today, Attorney General Mike Hilgers announced his office’s expansion of its fight against illegal or unlawful synthetic THC, by issuing cease &amp; desist letters relating to 104 retail locations and franchised stores in Omaha, Nebraska, that are selling illegal or unlawful THC-containing products.In 2025, Douglas County Sheriff’s Office and Nebraska Attorney General’s Office investigators&nbsp;made purchases of products from stores owned by 35 different companies. Each store investigated had at least one product marketed as hemp, which actually had a delta-9 concentration over the legal limit, making it marijuana, and had labels that incorrectly identified the content of the products.The letters issued to the Omaha stores communicate that many&nbsp;of the THC-containing products their company sells misrepresent the concentrations and types of THC contained within those products. This lack of proper labeling means that the stores are engaging in deceptive, unfair, and unsafe trade practices, and also engaging in illegal conduct.The Attorney General’s Office is sending formal letters to each of the stores, requesting they immediately cease all sales of THC-containing products to Nebraska Consumers to avoid litigation.&nbsp;The Attorney General’s Office is demanding that each store return a signed document indicating their Assurance of Voluntary Compliance. If they do not return a signed settlement, then the office will initiate litigation and will seek penalties and fees to the fullest extent allowed by law.“We promised that we would escalate our fight, and today are fulfilling that promise. Operating in Nebraska’s largest city does not immunize you from the law. These stores are selling harmful and unlawful products despite being on notice. Because of that, once litigation ensues, we will seek penalties to the fullest extent of the law, and will refer for criminal prosecution when necessary,”&nbsp;stated Attorney General Mike Hilgers."I am proud to join Attorney General Hilgers in his efforts. Synthetic THC products are putting a strain on our law enforcement resources and efforts statewide and hurting innocent people who&nbsp;think they are buying a safe and legal&nbsp;product. It is time for the Legislature to step up and clarify that synthetic THC products are not legal in Nebraska,” stated Douglas County Sheriff Aaron Hanson.Many of the stores have tobacco licenses and also sell synthetically produced THC-containing products, which may put their tobacco licenses at risk.In addition, as part of the investigation, the Attorney General’s Office uncovered the sale of marijuana. Sale of marijuana is a felony, and the Attorney General’s Office will provide the evidence to the Douglas County Attorney for consideration of criminal charges. Names of products include: Kushy Exotic THCA Flower, Flying Horse Vape-9G, and Road Trip Gummies.Attorney General Hilgers was also joined by Senators Kauth and Storm at the press conference. He indicated: “We appreciate Senator Kauth and Senator Storm leading the way in helping provide protections for Nebraskans with their support of&nbsp;LB316."Senator Kauth introduced LB316, and it was prioritized by Senator Storm. It is designed to stop the influx of dangerous products masquerading as hemp and clean up the illegal marketplace that has developed in Nebraska.To date, the Attorney General’s Office has filed 15 lawsuits alleging violations of the Consumer Protection Act (Unfairness), Consumer Protection Act (Deception), and Nebraska Pure Food Act. The Attorney General reported that 12 out of 15 of the lawsuits have been settled. The remaining three are being actively litigated.

 Announcement of New Developments in Delta-8 Enforcement Efforts

Paul Hammel <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/20/legal-battle-erupts-over-whether-ags-office-failed-to-properly-file-appeal-in-trevor-jones-case/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — A legal battle has erupted over whether a felony theft charge against the former director of History Nebraska, Trevor Jones, should finally be dismissed.

The issue is whether the Nebraska Attorney General’s Office failed to promptly file an appeal over the dismissal of a theft by deception charge that had been filed against Jones.

If the appeal was filed too late, the prosecution of Jones, who resigned the $164,800-a-year director’s job in 2022, could be over before any arguments are heard by the Nebraska Court of Appeals.

In January, Lancaster County District Judge Susan Strong tossed out the felony charge Jones faced, ruling that prosecutors had failed to bring him to trial within the state’s speedy trial deadline.

On March 5, Nebraska Court of Appeals Judge Frankie Moore asked state lawyers to demonstrate whether they had properly complied with a statute that requires appeals be applied within 20 days of such a dismissal, and whether the fee to appeal had been paid.

“The record now before us does not indicate that the State (Attorney General’s Office) has followed the requirements,” the judge wrote.

In a March 12 response, the AG’s office said the clerk of the Appeals Court had filed their appeal under the incorrect statute, and that prosecutors had complied with another statute that allows 30 days to appeal a final order by a district court judge.

A notice of appeal was filed on Feb. 20 to the Jan. 21 dismissal of the charge, according to a brief listing Attorney General Mike Hilgers and Assistant Attorney General Erin Tangeman, and that the docket fee was intended to be paid via an AG’s account kept by the court system.

That give and take was followed Monday by a request from Jones’ lawyers to sustain a “summary dismissal” of the charge against Jones because prosecutors had cited the wrong state statute and had failed to properly file their appeal.

The Appeals Court had not issued a ruling on the purported errors as of Wednesday afternoon.

Jones, now 52, was a controversial figure during the six years he headed the Nebraska State Historical Society. He changed the agency’s name to “History Nebraska” during his tenure and won praise for seeking to modernize and digitize the agency’s collections.

But he earned scorn from some employees — and high turnover — for a heavy-handed management system he imposed requiring workers to, for instance, frequently document how many files they had scanned.

He resigned shortly before a critical state audit was released in 2022. The audit raised concerns about his handling of $270,000 in donations from the Nebraska State Historical Society Foundation to cover the agency’s financial losses expected due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Instead of depositing the donations with the State Treasurer, as legally required, Jones funneled the money into a new private foundation he had set up to replace the State Historical Society Foundation. He had quarreled with its leaders. The money was never used to cover COVID losses.

Ultimately, the Attorney General’s office filed the felony charge against Jones, which carried a possible prison sentence of up to 20 years.

Jones had pleaded not guilty and maintained that he could manage the donations how he saw fit.

Prosecutors have maintained that the speed trial clock had been “halted” for a time due to a change in Jones’ legal defense team and that he should still stand trial for the theft offense.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1742480386914.jpeg" alt="The Nebraska State Historical Society is located just off the University of Nebraska-Lincoln campus at 1500 R St. (Paul Hammel/Nebraska Examiner)" />
 <figcaption>The Nebraska State Historical Society is located just off the University of Nebraska-Lincoln campus at 1500 R St. (Paul Hammel/Nebraska Examiner)</figcaption>
 </figure>Paul Hammel <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/20/legal-battle-erupts-over-whether-ags-office-failed-to-properly-file-appeal-in-trevor-jones-case/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — A legal battle has erupted over whether a felony theft charge against the former director of History Nebraska, Trevor Jones, should finally be dismissed.The issue is whether the Nebraska Attorney General’s Office failed to promptly file an appeal over the dismissal of a theft by deception charge that had been filed against Jones.If the appeal was filed too late, the prosecution of Jones, who resigned the $164,800-a-year director’s job in 2022, could be over before any arguments are heard by the Nebraska Court of Appeals.In January, Lancaster County District Judge Susan Strong tossed out the felony charge Jones faced, ruling that prosecutors had failed to bring him to trial within the state’s speedy trial deadline.On March 5, Nebraska Court of Appeals Judge Frankie Moore asked state lawyers to demonstrate whether they had properly complied with a statute that requires appeals be applied within 20 days of such a dismissal, and whether the fee to appeal had been paid.“The record now before us does not indicate that the State (Attorney General’s Office) has followed the requirements,” the judge wrote.In a March 12 response, the AG’s office said the clerk of the Appeals Court had filed their appeal under the incorrect statute, and that prosecutors had complied with another statute that allows 30 days to appeal a final order by a district court judge.A notice of appeal was filed on Feb. 20 to the Jan. 21 dismissal of the charge, according to a brief listing Attorney General Mike Hilgers and Assistant Attorney General Erin Tangeman, and that the docket fee was intended to be paid via an AG’s account kept by the court system.That give and take was followed Monday by a request from Jones’ lawyers to sustain a “summary dismissal” of the charge against Jones because prosecutors had cited the wrong state statute and had failed to properly file their appeal.The Appeals Court had not issued a ruling on the purported errors as of Wednesday afternoon.Jones, now 52, was a controversial figure during the six years he headed the Nebraska State Historical Society. He changed the agency’s name to “History Nebraska” during his tenure and won praise for seeking to modernize and digitize the agency’s collections.But he earned scorn from some employees — and high turnover — for a heavy-handed management system he imposed requiring workers to, for instance, frequently document how many files they had scanned.He resigned shortly before a critical state audit was released in 2022. The audit raised concerns about his handling of $270,000 in donations from the Nebraska State Historical Society Foundation to cover the agency’s financial losses expected due to the COVID-19 pandemic.Instead of depositing the donations with the State Treasurer, as legally required, Jones funneled the money into a new private foundation he had set up to replace the State Historical Society Foundation. He had quarreled with its leaders. The money was never used to cover COVID losses.Ultimately, the Attorney General’s office filed the felony charge against Jones, which carried a possible prison sentence of up to 20 years.Jones had pleaded not guilty and maintained that he could manage the donations how he saw fit.Prosecutors have maintained that the speed trial clock had been “halted” for a time due to a change in Jones’ legal defense team and that he should still stand trial for the theft offense.

Legal Battle Erupts Over Whether AG’s Office Failed to Properly File Appeal in Trevor Jones Case

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/19/lawmakers-advance-bill-to-tax-nicotine-like-products-in-nebraska-such-as-zyn-pouches/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — State lawmakers took another step Wednesday toward cracking down on nicotine and “nicotine-like” products in Nebraska, advancing a bill to add a 20% wholesale excise tax on alternative products.

The Legislature&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_votes.php?KeyID=11846" target="_blank">voted 41-0</a>&nbsp;to advance&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59013" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 9</a>, from State Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward. It would define “alternative nicotine products” and “nicotine analogues” in state law. Hughes’ goal is to target all future products rather than requiring specific legislation each time.

“Next year, when the new product comes out, we don’t have to bring back a bill to grab on to that new product,” Hughes said during debate. “It’ll automatically fall under our regulation.”

The change would capture nicotine pouches like the brand Zyn, creating an “umbrella” for enforcement that Hughes said is needed to help curb youth usage of the drugs, while generating revenue.

Currently, such new products are taxed the same as other taxable products —&nbsp;a generic statewide 5.5-cent sales tax rate, plus local sales taxes.

If passed, Hughes’ latest bill would take effect Jan. 1. It is estimated to bring in&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/FN/LB125_20250221-114731.pdf" target="_blank">$3.4 million</a>&nbsp;in the first two fiscal years, by June 30, 2027.

Hughes has pushed multiple bills in her first two years to increase or add taxes and regulations to nicotine products, namely vaping. She has a separate bill this year,&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58761" target="_blank">LB 712</a>, to change the state excise tax on vapes to 40% wholesale effective Oct. 1, rather than a lower two-tiered rate.&nbsp;

That proposal is estimated to bring in&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/FN/LB712_20250227-121304.pdf" target="_blank">$56.4 million</a>&nbsp;by the middle of 2027.

Both efforts could be key in helping plug the&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/decrease-in-federal-share-of-nebraska-medicaid-costs-increases-state-budget-shortfall/">state’s projected budget shortfall</a>&nbsp;or help cover some costs of Hughes’ 2025 priority bill,&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58984" target="_blank">LB 303</a>, to help&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/02/10/school-ag-advocates-largely-endorse-nebraska-school-finance-reform-proposal/">lower property taxes</a>&nbsp;by&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/01/15/gov-pillen-proposes-his-answer-to-432-million-projected-budget-shortfall/">directing more state dollars to K-12 schools</a>.

Former State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of the Elkhorn area proposed an&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/08/12/revenue-committee-advances-ne-property-tax-relief-package-with-debate-to-start-tuesday/">alternative nicotine products tax</a>&nbsp;at 10 cents per ounce during last year’s summer special session, but it ultimately wasn’t adopted.

Hughes at the time said she&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/108/PDF/Transcripts/Revenue/2024-08-07.pdf" target="_blank">planned to look at such a tax</a>&nbsp;in the interim. As she repeated Wednesday, the proposal shifted toward a wholesale tax as a more “fair and equitable” approach. She said a weight-based tax could incentivize companies to concentrate nicotine, which could hurt children the most.

“This would be short-sighted and potentially dangerous to the customer,” Hughes said. “We don’t want to do it by weight, because it is a chemical substance.”

State Sen. Jane Raybould of Lincoln proposed an amendment to move to the weight-based tax anyway, echoing concerns of some tobacco lobbyists that the 20% wholesale tax could equate to a 700% tax increase on some products, which she said would be “regressive.”

Raybould’s amendment sought the same tax rate as snuff: 44 cents per ounce. Raybould said it didn’t make sense that the bill went to the General Affairs Committee and not the Revenue Committee, or that alternative nicotine products shouldn’t be taxed more than snuff or cigarettes. General Affairs has general jurisdiction over topics such as alcohol, tobacco, marijuana and gambling.

“Imposing taxes on products designed to reduce smoking-related harm really might even deter harm-reduction efforts and drive consumers to riskier behaviors,” Raybould said. “I know Senator Hughes and I are not fans of vaping, either. But I just want to make sure that we’re looking at this fairly.”

State Sen. Brad von Gillern of the Elkhorn area, Revenue Committee chair, said the committee destination critique was a “red herring” intended to distract. He said nothing would have changed and argued the lobby had “shopped” the amendment as early as Wednesday morning.

“Clearly, it’s nothing that Senator Raybould has been working on or considering for some time,” von Gillern said.

Hughes pushed Raybould on where she got her amendment. Raybould said she brought it “on behalf of one of our industries that advocate the lobby for these issues.” Pressed further, Raybould added it was “one that deals with tobacco products.”

Hughes specifically asked whether the change came from Philip Morris International, a multinational tobacco company with products sold in over 180 countries, including Marlboro cigarettes. The company is represented in the statehouse by&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskastrategies.com/" target="_blank">Nebraska Strategies</a>, a local lobbying firm.

Raybould told Hughes: “Perhaps … but I don’t feel comfortable sharing the name with you, if that’s OK.”

Raybould similarly declined to answer a reporter’s question on the lobbyist’s identity.

Her amendment&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_votes.php?KeyID=11846" target="_blank">failed 24-5</a>, with just Raybould and State Sens. Beau Ballard of Lincoln, Carolyn Bosn of Lincoln, Mike Jacobson of North Platte and Dave Murman of Glenvil in support.

LB 9, one of this year’s two&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/session/priority.php" target="_blank">General Affairs Committee priority bills</a>, will have two more rounds of debate.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1742414395517.jpeg" alt=" A Nebraska bill seeks to add a 20% wholesale tax to “alternative nicotine products” such as the ones shown here. State Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward, who is leading the legislation, brought these items during debate on Wednesday, March 19, 2025, to show to her colleagues what they are and why a weight-based tax for the light items would not be a proper approach. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)" />
 <figcaption> A Nebraska bill seeks to add a 20% wholesale tax to “alternative nicotine products” such as the ones shown here. State Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward, who is leading the legislation, brought these items during debate on Wednesday, March 19, 2025, to show to her colleagues what they are and why a weight-based tax for the light items would not be a proper approach. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)</figcaption>
 </figure>Zach Wendling<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/19/lawmakers-advance-bill-to-tax-nicotine-like-products-in-nebraska-such-as-zyn-pouches/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — State lawmakers took another step Wednesday toward cracking down on nicotine and “nicotine-like” products in Nebraska, advancing a bill to add a 20% wholesale excise tax on alternative products.The Legislature&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_votes.php?KeyID=11846" target="_blank">voted 41-0</a>&nbsp;to advance&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59013" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 9</a>, from State Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward. It would define “alternative nicotine products” and “nicotine analogues” in state law. Hughes’ goal is to target all future products rather than requiring specific legislation each time.“Next year, when the new product comes out, we don’t have to bring back a bill to grab on to that new product,” Hughes said during debate. “It’ll automatically fall under our regulation.”<h2>An ‘umbrella’ approach</h2>The change would capture nicotine pouches like the brand Zyn, creating an “umbrella” for enforcement that Hughes said is needed to help curb youth usage of the drugs, while generating revenue.Currently, such new products are taxed the same as other taxable products —&nbsp;a generic statewide 5.5-cent sales tax rate, plus local sales taxes.If passed, Hughes’ latest bill would take effect Jan. 1. It is estimated to bring in&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/FN/LB125_20250221-114731.pdf" target="_blank">$3.4 million</a>&nbsp;in the first two fiscal years, by June 30, 2027.Hughes has pushed multiple bills in her first two years to increase or add taxes and regulations to nicotine products, namely vaping. She has a separate bill this year,&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58761" target="_blank">LB 712</a>, to change the state excise tax on vapes to 40% wholesale effective Oct. 1, rather than a lower two-tiered rate.&nbsp;That proposal is estimated to bring in&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/FN/LB712_20250227-121304.pdf" target="_blank">$56.4 million</a>&nbsp;by the middle of 2027.Both efforts could be key in helping plug the&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/decrease-in-federal-share-of-nebraska-medicaid-costs-increases-state-budget-shortfall/">state’s projected budget shortfall</a>&nbsp;or help cover some costs of Hughes’ 2025 priority bill,&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58984" target="_blank">LB 303</a>, to help&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/02/10/school-ag-advocates-largely-endorse-nebraska-school-finance-reform-proposal/">lower property taxes</a>&nbsp;by&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/01/15/gov-pillen-proposes-his-answer-to-432-million-projected-budget-shortfall/">directing more state dollars to K-12 schools</a>.Former State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of the Elkhorn area proposed an&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/08/12/revenue-committee-advances-ne-property-tax-relief-package-with-debate-to-start-tuesday/">alternative nicotine products tax</a>&nbsp;at 10 cents per ounce during last year’s summer special session, but it ultimately wasn’t adopted.Hughes at the time said she&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/108/PDF/Transcripts/Revenue/2024-08-07.pdf" target="_blank">planned to look at such a tax</a>&nbsp;in the interim. As she repeated Wednesday, the proposal shifted toward a wholesale tax as a more “fair and equitable” approach. She said a weight-based tax could incentivize companies to concentrate nicotine, which could hurt children the most.“This would be short-sighted and potentially dangerous to the customer,” Hughes said. “We don’t want to do it by weight, because it is a chemical substance.”<h2>Rejected lobbyist push</h2>State Sen. Jane Raybould of Lincoln proposed an amendment to move to the weight-based tax anyway, echoing concerns of some tobacco lobbyists that the 20% wholesale tax could equate to a 700% tax increase on some products, which she said would be “regressive.”Raybould’s amendment sought the same tax rate as snuff: 44 cents per ounce. Raybould said it didn’t make sense that the bill went to the General Affairs Committee and not the Revenue Committee, or that alternative nicotine products shouldn’t be taxed more than snuff or cigarettes. General Affairs has general jurisdiction over topics such as alcohol, tobacco, marijuana and gambling.“Imposing taxes on products designed to reduce smoking-related harm really might even deter harm-reduction efforts and drive consumers to riskier behaviors,” Raybould said. “I know Senator Hughes and I are not fans of vaping, either. But I just want to make sure that we’re looking at this fairly.”State Sen. Brad von Gillern of the Elkhorn area, Revenue Committee chair, said the committee destination critique was a “red herring” intended to distract. He said nothing would have changed and argued the lobby had “shopped” the amendment as early as Wednesday morning.“Clearly, it’s nothing that Senator Raybould has been working on or considering for some time,” von Gillern said.Hughes pushed Raybould on where she got her amendment. Raybould said she brought it “on behalf of one of our industries that advocate the lobby for these issues.” Pressed further, Raybould added it was “one that deals with tobacco products.”Hughes specifically asked whether the change came from Philip Morris International, a multinational tobacco company with products sold in over 180 countries, including Marlboro cigarettes. The company is represented in the statehouse by&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskastrategies.com/" target="_blank">Nebraska Strategies</a>, a local lobbying firm.Raybould told Hughes: “Perhaps … but I don’t feel comfortable sharing the name with you, if that’s OK.”Raybould similarly declined to answer a reporter’s question on the lobbyist’s identity.Her amendment&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_votes.php?KeyID=11846" target="_blank">failed 24-5</a>, with just Raybould and State Sens. Beau Ballard of Lincoln, Carolyn Bosn of Lincoln, Mike Jacobson of North Platte and Dave Murman of Glenvil in support.LB 9, one of this year’s two&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/session/priority.php" target="_blank">General Affairs Committee priority bills</a>, will have two more rounds of debate.

Lawmakers advance bill to tax ‘nicotine-like’ products in Nebraska, such as ‘Zyn’ pouches

The&nbsp;<a href="http://news.legislature.ne.gov/ban" target="_blank">Banking, Commerce and Insurance Committee</a>&nbsp;heard testimony March 17 on a measure that would prohibit implementation of merchant category codes in Nebraska that identify firearm retailers.

Hastings Sen. Dan Lonowski, sponsor of&nbsp;<a href="http://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/search_by_number.php?DocumentNumber=LB686&amp;Legislature=109th" target="_blank">LB686</a>, said the measure is intended to protect the privacy of Nebraska firearm owners and retailers from disclosure of information that could lead to discrimination against them.

The bill would prohibit a payment card network from requiring or incentivizing use of a merchant category code in a manner that distinguishes a firearm retailer from other retailers. In addition, a covered entity could not assign a firearm retailer a merchant category code that distinguishes them from other retailers.

LB686 also would prohibit government entities, officials, agents or employees of a government entity or official from knowingly keeping or causing to be kept any list, record or registry of privately owned firearms or the owners of firearms, except for those records kept during the regular course of a criminal investigation, prosecution or as otherwise required by law.

The Nebraska Attorney General’s Office would investigate alleged violations of the bill’s provisions and violators could be subject to injunctions and civil penalties.

Lonowski said merchant category codes are used by payment card networks to identify entities by the types of goods they sell or services they provide. Prior to 2023, he said, merchants who sold firearms or ammunition were categorized as general merchandise or sporting goods.

Nineteen states have passed laws similar to LB686, Lonowski said, in an attempt to protect the privacy of gun owners whose purchases might be identified by merchant category codes and later used against them.

“Nebraska should follow the lead of those states and protect the privacy of gun owners,” Lonowski said. “By enacting LB686, we affirm our commitment to protecting the constitutional rights and privacy of Nebraska citizens and businesses.”

Moriah Day, director of government relations and state affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, testified in favor of the proposal.

He said California, New York and Colorado have passed legislation requiring implementation of the new codes for firearm and ammunition merchants. Although there currently is a pause on implementing the new codes nationally, he said, the bill would be a positive proactive step to keep implementation from happening in the future.

“To make certain this pause remains in place permanently and the status quo is maintained, I would urge you to join the growing list of 19 states that have passed similar measures and pass LB686 this session,” Day said.

Also supporting the bill was Travis Couture-Lovelady, representing the National Rifle Association. He said the measure would ensure that businesses and customers aren’t “unjustly singled out” or discriminated against by financial institutions for exercising their constitutional Second Amendment rights.

“It’s a preemptive strike to protect the rights of Nebraskans,” Couture-Lovelady said.

Ryan McIntosh of the Nebraska Bankers Association testified in opposition to LB686, saying it could disrupt interstate commerce. Some states require use of merchant category codes, he said, and it would be problematic if other states outright ban their use.

Also speaking against the proposal was Dexter Schrodt, president and CEO of the Nebraska Independent Community Bankers. While the proposal is meant to protect firearms retailers, he said, it could hamper the ability of community banks to serve their customers by limiting their ability to interact with payment card networks based on policies that banks cannot control.

“In principle, we do oppose any legislation that creates, in statute, language that protects one industry by creating requirements [on] and limiting rights of another industry,” Schrodt said.

The committee took no immediate action on LB686.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1742394489286.jpeg" alt="Sen. Dan Lonowski (Unicameral Update)" />
 <figcaption>Sen. Dan Lonowski (Unicameral Update)</figcaption>
 </figure>Unicameral UpdateThe&nbsp;<a href="http://news.legislature.ne.gov/ban" target="_blank">Banking, Commerce and Insurance Committee</a>&nbsp;heard testimony March 17 on a measure that would prohibit implementation of merchant category codes in Nebraska that identify firearm retailers.Hastings Sen. Dan Lonowski, sponsor of&nbsp;<a href="http://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/search_by_number.php?DocumentNumber=LB686&amp;Legislature=109th" target="_blank">LB686</a>, said the measure is intended to protect the privacy of Nebraska firearm owners and retailers from disclosure of information that could lead to discrimination against them.The bill would prohibit a payment card network from requiring or incentivizing use of a merchant category code in a manner that distinguishes a firearm retailer from other retailers. In addition, a covered entity could not assign a firearm retailer a merchant category code that distinguishes them from other retailers.LB686 also would prohibit government entities, officials, agents or employees of a government entity or official from knowingly keeping or causing to be kept any list, record or registry of privately owned firearms or the owners of firearms, except for those records kept during the regular course of a criminal investigation, prosecution or as otherwise required by law.The Nebraska Attorney General’s Office would investigate alleged violations of the bill’s provisions and violators could be subject to injunctions and civil penalties.Lonowski said merchant category codes are used by payment card networks to identify entities by the types of goods they sell or services they provide. Prior to 2023, he said, merchants who sold firearms or ammunition were categorized as general merchandise or sporting goods.Nineteen states have passed laws similar to LB686, Lonowski said, in an attempt to protect the privacy of gun owners whose purchases might be identified by merchant category codes and later used against them.“Nebraska should follow the lead of those states and protect the privacy of gun owners,” Lonowski said. “By enacting LB686, we affirm our commitment to protecting the constitutional rights and privacy of Nebraska citizens and businesses.”Moriah Day, director of government relations and state affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, testified in favor of the proposal.He said California, New York and Colorado have passed legislation requiring implementation of the new codes for firearm and ammunition merchants. Although there currently is a pause on implementing the new codes nationally, he said, the bill would be a positive proactive step to keep implementation from happening in the future.“To make certain this pause remains in place permanently and the status quo is maintained, I would urge you to join the growing list of 19 states that have passed similar measures and pass LB686 this session,” Day said.Also supporting the bill was Travis Couture-Lovelady, representing the National Rifle Association. He said the measure would ensure that businesses and customers aren’t “unjustly singled out” or discriminated against by financial institutions for exercising their constitutional Second Amendment rights.“It’s a preemptive strike to protect the rights of Nebraskans,” Couture-Lovelady said.Ryan McIntosh of the Nebraska Bankers Association testified in opposition to LB686, saying it could disrupt interstate commerce. Some states require use of merchant category codes, he said, and it would be problematic if other states outright ban their use.Also speaking against the proposal was Dexter Schrodt, president and CEO of the Nebraska Independent Community Bankers. While the proposal is meant to protect firearms retailers, he said, it could hamper the ability of community banks to serve their customers by limiting their ability to interact with payment card networks based on policies that banks cannot control.“In principle, we do oppose any legislation that creates, in statute, language that protects one industry by creating requirements [on] and limiting rights of another industry,” Schrodt said.The committee took no immediate action on LB686.

Bill would block credit card coding of firearm merchants, registries

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/17/debate-delayed-on-proposal-to-more-frequently-change-nebraska-lawmaker-compensation/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN —&nbsp;A legislative proposal to let an independent, nonpartisan commission set the compensation of future Nebraska state senators is now “on pause” and will fall to the bottom of legislative priorities in 2025.

State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair, the sponsor of&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59042" target="_blank">Legislative Resolution 25CA</a>, announced the decision Monday after multiple senators spoke against the proposal during its first two hours of debate on Friday. Hansen said much of the opposition focused on issues that didn’t pertain to the proposal itself, and he wanted to move forward.

“In the good nature of not holding up the session for I don’t know how many more hours, I think we have some other work that needs to get done,” Hansen said.

Hansen said he&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/05/proposal-for-legislative-compensation-commission-advances-from-nebraska-committee/">still hopes to address the proposal</a>&nbsp;later this year, or early next year, which if passed would send the final decision to voters at the November 2026 general election.

The&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/AM/AM526.pdf" target="_blank">intent of the commission</a>&nbsp;is to remove lawmakers’ annual $12,000 salary from the Nebraska Constitution. Because it is in the Constitution, pay increases, or decreases, can’t happen without a statewide vote, unlike other state officials. The commission could also consider health care benefits, per diems or reimbursement rates.&nbsp;

Any compensation changes could occur no earlier than 2029, after lawmakers’ current terms.

Lawmakers ultimately would need to appropriate funds to cover any pay increases, Speaker John Arch of La Vista and Hansen said during debate. State Sen. John Fredrickson of Omaha suggested tightening the commission’s authority to make it a requirement.

Voters last approved a salary increase in 1988, bumping salaries up from $400 each month ($3,600 annually) to $1,000 each month ($12,000 annually).

“It’s not dead by any means,” Hansen said of his LR 25CA. “Just want to bring it up later and get the people’s work done first.”

During Friday’s debate, State Sens. Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha, Danielle Conrad of Lincoln and Megan Hunt of Omaha said lawmakers didn’t deserve raises if they wouldn’t support working families.

Cavanaugh said “we are not doing our jobs,” and she graded the Legislature’s work an “F.”

“We are nickel and diming people of Nebraska on everything,” Cavanaugh said. “I don’t feel that, in good conscience, I can support something to raise our own salary, as measly as our salary is, so long as we can’t also raise resources we give to people who are 50% of the poverty level, who make less than $12,000 a year.”

The progressive lawmakers pointed to proposals that they said could hurt workers or weaken protections for minimum wage, child care, affordable housing, transportation, food or education.

“They think that legislators deserve more than everyday working families, and I disagree,” Conrad said.

Conrad and Hunt said supporters speaking about&nbsp;reinforcing&nbsp;institutional strength and integrity were hypocritical, with Conrad saying they were only doing so “when it has an opportunity to benefit yourself, personally, financially, individually.”

Hunt said strength comes from lawmakers with the personal integrity to stand up for the legislative branch and their constituents, “not from a paycheck.”

“Pay raises are not going to make any lawmakers fight executive overreach,” Hunt said. “That takes leadership and courage.”

State Sen. Myron Dorn of Adams, whose LR 7CA would increase legislative salaries up to $30,000, said he worked with Hansen on the commission idea.&nbsp;Dorn and Hansen will be term-limited in January 2027.

Dorn&nbsp;said lawmakers work an hourly wage of about $5.67 during the session and devote two to three days each week full time later in the year. He and others said it very much limits who even considers running for office.

In the lead-up to the debate, Dorn said emails echoed the comments from Cavanaugh, stating: “You’re not doing a good job, you’re not worth the pay that you have now.”

Dorn said he turned that around in his replies based on a philosophy his dad taught him, that “you get what you pay for.”

“When we’re answering those emails, I’m telling those people that if you’re complaining about the senators and low quality of people we have up here, just remember, you get what you pay for, and that happens quite often in life,” Dorn said.

State Sen. Christy Armendariz of Omaha said that when she was considering running for office for the 2022 election, she approached her predecessor, former State Sen. Brett Lindstrom, and told him she needed to keep her full-time job.

Lindstrom hesitated, she said, but told her he thought she could pull it off. And she did for her first two years, working 6:30 a.m. to 8 p.m. during the week and working weekends.

But this year, she said she realized that wasn’t a sustainable path and that she wasn’t giving “100%” to either her constituents or her full-time position. So, she quit.

“It just isn’t my nature to do anything part way,” Armendariz said.

Armendariz said she would still run again, knowing it is a volunteer position, but “we’re really, really far away from getting super valuable people on the floor, unless they are self-funded in some other way.”

“I do think it is fair, since the people are the ones that are the recipients of what is done on this floor, the people should be the ones to make a decision whether they want to expand that pool of people that can be elected,” Armendariz said.

State Sens. Terrell McKinney and Ashlei Spivey, both of Omaha, as well as Cavanaugh and Hunt said the Legislature needs more diversity in its membership.

Similar to Armendariz, Spivey said she puts in 18 hours of work each day into her legislative duties and paid work outside the Capitol, while still needing to be a mother and wife.&nbsp;She said LR 25CA was a “weird dichotomy” between what lawmakers say versus what they do.

“I would love to have more women in the body that are parents, more folks of color, working people that can really bring perspectives and advocate for Nebraskans in a way in which I think that doesn’t always happen currently, or in our history,” Spivey said.

McKinney said something needs to change, which could help people “who care” decide to run.

State Sen. Rob Dover of Norfolk said the proposal was a good idea but was “probably the right bill at a wrong time.”&nbsp;

He pointed to the state’s&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/decrease-in-federal-share-of-nebraska-medicaid-costs-increases-state-budget-shortfall/">$457 million projected budget shortfall for the next two years</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/02/18/preliminary-appropriations-committee-budget-unveiled-includes-pillen-cuts-to-nu/">prior to any legislative action</a>. Dover asked why the proposal was coming up while the state is considering cutting dollars for public health, the University of Nebraska, cancer research, dual credit reimbursement and affordable housing.

“It makes no sense to me whatsoever,” Dover said.

Dover, who will be term-limited in January 2029, warned his colleagues running for future office that if they voted for the proposal, it was a matter of when, not if, they’d have a mailer attacking them for doing so.

Conrad agreed and pointed to former State Sen. Tony Vargas of Omaha who was&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/05/proposal-for-legislative-compensation-commission-advances-from-nebraska-committee/">blasted</a>&nbsp;for a similar 2018 proposal. Conrad said LR 25CA was “nothing more than another political trap.”

“It’s not a good faith effort to strengthen the institution,” she said. “It’s an effort to force Nebraska legislators to continually vote on their own pay raise and to use it against them at election time.”

Hansen said that if lawmakers do a “crappy job,” which he said he feels has happened in some years, the commission could decide to cut compensation.

“They could actually lower our pay, that’s what I love about this,” Hansen said. “The onus is on us, as representatives of the people of Nebraska to do a good job, to listen, to do the people’s work. And if we don’t, we could be SOL.”

It will ultimately be up to Speaker Arch whether he reschedules the measure. The proposal has about six hours left on first-round debate and would face two more debates, if advanced.&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/articles.php?article=XVI-1#:~:text=When%20two%20or%20more%20amendments,vote%20on%20each%20amendment%20separately." target="_blank">At least 30 lawmakers</a>&nbsp;would need to approve the bill on final reading.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1742326802552.jpeg" alt=" State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair, left, leans in to listen to State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln at a legislative retreat in Kearney on Friday, Dec. 13, 2024. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)" />
 <figcaption> State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair, left, leans in to listen to State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln at a legislative retreat in Kearney on Friday, Dec. 13, 2024. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)</figcaption>
 </figure>Zach Wendling<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/17/debate-delayed-on-proposal-to-more-frequently-change-nebraska-lawmaker-compensation/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN —&nbsp;A legislative proposal to let an independent, nonpartisan commission set the compensation of future Nebraska state senators is now “on pause” and will fall to the bottom of legislative priorities in 2025.State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair, the sponsor of&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59042" target="_blank">Legislative Resolution 25CA</a>, announced the decision Monday after multiple senators spoke against the proposal during its first two hours of debate on Friday. Hansen said much of the opposition focused on issues that didn’t pertain to the proposal itself, and he wanted to move forward.“In the good nature of not holding up the session for I don’t know how many more hours, I think we have some other work that needs to get done,” Hansen said.Hansen said he&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/05/proposal-for-legislative-compensation-commission-advances-from-nebraska-committee/">still hopes to address the proposal</a>&nbsp;later this year, or early next year, which if passed would send the final decision to voters at the November 2026 general election.The&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/AM/AM526.pdf" target="_blank">intent of the commission</a>&nbsp;is to remove lawmakers’ annual $12,000 salary from the Nebraska Constitution. Because it is in the Constitution, pay increases, or decreases, can’t happen without a statewide vote, unlike other state officials. The commission could also consider health care benefits, per diems or reimbursement rates.&nbsp;Any compensation changes could occur no earlier than 2029, after lawmakers’ current terms.Lawmakers ultimately would need to appropriate funds to cover any pay increases, Speaker John Arch of La Vista and Hansen said during debate. State Sen. John Fredrickson of Omaha suggested tightening the commission’s authority to make it a requirement.Voters last approved a salary increase in 1988, bumping salaries up from $400 each month ($3,600 annually) to $1,000 each month ($12,000 annually).“It’s not dead by any means,” Hansen said of his LR 25CA. “Just want to bring it up later and get the people’s work done first.”<h2>‘We are not doing our jobs’</h2>During Friday’s debate, State Sens. Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha, Danielle Conrad of Lincoln and Megan Hunt of Omaha said lawmakers didn’t deserve raises if they wouldn’t support working families.Cavanaugh said “we are not doing our jobs,” and she graded the Legislature’s work an “F.”“We are nickel and diming people of Nebraska on everything,” Cavanaugh said. “I don’t feel that, in good conscience, I can support something to raise our own salary, as measly as our salary is, so long as we can’t also raise resources we give to people who are 50% of the poverty level, who make less than $12,000 a year.”The progressive lawmakers pointed to proposals that they said could hurt workers or weaken protections for minimum wage, child care, affordable housing, transportation, food or education.“They think that legislators deserve more than everyday working families, and I disagree,” Conrad said.Conrad and Hunt said supporters speaking about&nbsp;reinforcing&nbsp;institutional strength and integrity were hypocritical, with Conrad saying they were only doing so “when it has an opportunity to benefit yourself, personally, financially, individually.”Hunt said strength comes from lawmakers with the personal integrity to stand up for the legislative branch and their constituents, “not from a paycheck.”“Pay raises are not going to make any lawmakers fight executive overreach,” Hunt said. “That takes leadership and courage.”<h2>‘You get what you pay for’</h2>State Sen. Myron Dorn of Adams, whose LR 7CA would increase legislative salaries up to $30,000, said he worked with Hansen on the commission idea.&nbsp;Dorn and Hansen will be term-limited in January 2027.Dorn&nbsp;said lawmakers work an hourly wage of about $5.67 during the session and devote two to three days each week full time later in the year. He and others said it very much limits who even considers running for office.In the lead-up to the debate, Dorn said emails echoed the comments from Cavanaugh, stating: “You’re not doing a good job, you’re not worth the pay that you have now.”Dorn said he turned that around in his replies based on a philosophy his dad taught him, that “you get what you pay for.”“When we’re answering those emails, I’m telling those people that if you’re complaining about the senators and low quality of people we have up here, just remember, you get what you pay for, and that happens quite often in life,” Dorn said.<h2>Devoting ‘100%’ to the job</h2>State Sen. Christy Armendariz of Omaha said that when she was considering running for office for the 2022 election, she approached her predecessor, former State Sen. Brett Lindstrom, and told him she needed to keep her full-time job.Lindstrom hesitated, she said, but told her he thought she could pull it off. And she did for her first two years, working 6:30 a.m. to 8 p.m. during the week and working weekends.But this year, she said she realized that wasn’t a sustainable path and that she wasn’t giving “100%” to either her constituents or her full-time position. So, she quit.“It just isn’t my nature to do anything part way,” Armendariz said.Armendariz said she would still run again, knowing it is a volunteer position, but “we’re really, really far away from getting super valuable people on the floor, unless they are self-funded in some other way.”“I do think it is fair, since the people are the ones that are the recipients of what is done on this floor, the people should be the ones to make a decision whether they want to expand that pool of people that can be elected,” Armendariz said.State Sens. Terrell McKinney and Ashlei Spivey, both of Omaha, as well as Cavanaugh and Hunt said the Legislature needs more diversity in its membership.Similar to Armendariz, Spivey said she puts in 18 hours of work each day into her legislative duties and paid work outside the Capitol, while still needing to be a mother and wife.&nbsp;She said LR 25CA was a “weird dichotomy” between what lawmakers say versus what they do.“I would love to have more women in the body that are parents, more folks of color, working people that can really bring perspectives and advocate for Nebraskans in a way in which I think that doesn’t always happen currently, or in our history,” Spivey said.McKinney said something needs to change, which could help people “who care” decide to run.<h2>‘Another political trap’</h2>State Sen. Rob Dover of Norfolk said the proposal was a good idea but was “probably the right bill at a wrong time.”&nbsp;He pointed to the state’s&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/decrease-in-federal-share-of-nebraska-medicaid-costs-increases-state-budget-shortfall/">$457 million projected budget shortfall for the next two years</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/02/18/preliminary-appropriations-committee-budget-unveiled-includes-pillen-cuts-to-nu/">prior to any legislative action</a>. Dover asked why the proposal was coming up while the state is considering cutting dollars for public health, the University of Nebraska, cancer research, dual credit reimbursement and affordable housing.“It makes no sense to me whatsoever,” Dover said.Dover, who will be term-limited in January 2029, warned his colleagues running for future office that if they voted for the proposal, it was a matter of when, not if, they’d have a mailer attacking them for doing so.Conrad agreed and pointed to former State Sen. Tony Vargas of Omaha who was&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/05/proposal-for-legislative-compensation-commission-advances-from-nebraska-committee/">blasted</a>&nbsp;for a similar 2018 proposal. Conrad said LR 25CA was “nothing more than another political trap.”“It’s not a good faith effort to strengthen the institution,” she said. “It’s an effort to force Nebraska legislators to continually vote on their own pay raise and to use it against them at election time.”Hansen said that if lawmakers do a “crappy job,” which he said he feels has happened in some years, the commission could decide to cut compensation.“They could actually lower our pay, that’s what I love about this,” Hansen said. “The onus is on us, as representatives of the people of Nebraska to do a good job, to listen, to do the people’s work. And if we don’t, we could be SOL.”It will ultimately be up to Speaker Arch whether he reschedules the measure. The proposal has about six hours left on first-round debate and would face two more debates, if advanced.&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/articles.php?article=XVI-1#:~:text=When%20two%20or%20more%20amendments,vote%20on%20each%20amendment%20separately." target="_blank">At least 30 lawmakers</a>&nbsp;would need to approve the bill on final reading.

Debate delayed on proposal to more frequently change Nebraska lawmaker compensation

OMAHA, NEB. – The Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation hosted a news conference to emphasize the crucial role agriculture plays in the state’s economy, showcasing its impact on Nebraska's growth and sustainability as they celebrate National Agriculture Day, March 18.

According to economic data, Nebraska’s agricultural sector supports more than 244,000 jobs statewide and contributes $97.4 billion in sales output. The industry also generates over $6 billion in tax revenue, further cementing agriculture as a vital economic driver for the state.

“Nebraska’s agricultural industry continues to be a cornerstone of our economy, providing jobs, economic growth, and tax revenue for our communities,” said Mark McHargue, president of the Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation board of directors. “From small family farms to large agri-businesses, agriculture is integral to every corner of our state.”

Agriculture is responsible for more than 40% of jobs in 54 of Nebraska’s 93 counties, reflecting its far-reaching influence. Douglas County stands out as a major contributor, adding an impressive $3.9 billion in value to the local economy, which is $1 billion more than the next leading county. Lancaster County follows closely, contributing $1.4 billion. Douglas County also leads the state with over 29,000 agriculture-related jobs, solidifying its role as Nebraska's agricultural hub.

“Douglas County’s leadership in agricultural value and job creation highlights the sector’s impact not only in rural areas but also in urban centers,” said David Bracht, president of the Agriculture Council for the Greater Omaha Chamber. “Agriculture offers vast opportunities for Nebraskans, from production and processing to world-leading innovation.”

Agriculture is Nebraska’s driving industry impacting every community across Nebraska-rural and urban. Omaha is a hub for agribusiness creating career opportunities across the agriculture sector.

“Omaha innovators have created a city where you can dig in the dirt or dive into data,” said Sherry Vinton, director of Nebraska Department of Agriculture. “Whether a gearhead, number cruncher, sustainability dreamer or a content creator, Nebraska agriculture has a place for you!”

Agriculture touches everyone’s life! From food on the table to fuel in vehicles and everything in between, agriculture is a part of everything! Today we celebrate National Agriculture Day and the industry that feeds, clothes, and energizes the world!

“Think about everything you’ve done today—the food you ate, the clothes you wore, and the fuel you used to get around—all are made possible by agriculture. The Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation is dedicated to raising awareness of agriculture’s vital role in both rural communities and urban areas across the state. Agriculture is part of our everyday lives. It starts on the farm and ranch,” McHargue added.

The mission of the Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation is to engage youth, educators, and the general public to promote an understanding of the vital importance of agriculture in the lives of all Nebraskans. The Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. For more information about the Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation, visit&nbsp;<a href="http://www.nefbfoundation.org/" target="_blank">www.nefbfoundation.org</a>.&nbsp;

Nebraska Farm BureauOMAHA, NEB. – The Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation hosted a news conference to emphasize the crucial role agriculture plays in the state’s economy, showcasing its impact on Nebraska's growth and sustainability as they celebrate National Agriculture Day, March 18.According to economic data, Nebraska’s agricultural sector supports more than 244,000 jobs statewide and contributes $97.4 billion in sales output. The industry also generates over $6 billion in tax revenue, further cementing agriculture as a vital economic driver for the state.“Nebraska’s agricultural industry continues to be a cornerstone of our economy, providing jobs, economic growth, and tax revenue for our communities,” said Mark McHargue, president of the Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation board of directors. “From small family farms to large agri-businesses, agriculture is integral to every corner of our state.”Agriculture is responsible for more than 40% of jobs in 54 of Nebraska’s 93 counties, reflecting its far-reaching influence. Douglas County stands out as a major contributor, adding an impressive $3.9 billion in value to the local economy, which is $1 billion more than the next leading county. Lancaster County follows closely, contributing $1.4 billion. Douglas County also leads the state with over 29,000 agriculture-related jobs, solidifying its role as Nebraska's agricultural hub.“Douglas County’s leadership in agricultural value and job creation highlights the sector’s impact not only in rural areas but also in urban centers,” said David Bracht, president of the Agriculture Council for the Greater Omaha Chamber. “Agriculture offers vast opportunities for Nebraskans, from production and processing to world-leading innovation.”Agriculture is Nebraska’s driving industry impacting every community across Nebraska-rural and urban. Omaha is a hub for agribusiness creating career opportunities across the agriculture sector.“Omaha innovators have created a city where you can dig in the dirt or dive into data,” said Sherry Vinton, director of Nebraska Department of Agriculture. “Whether a gearhead, number cruncher, sustainability dreamer or a content creator, Nebraska agriculture has a place for you!”Agriculture touches everyone’s life! From food on the table to fuel in vehicles and everything in between, agriculture is a part of everything! Today we celebrate National Agriculture Day and the industry that feeds, clothes, and energizes the world!“Think about everything you’ve done today—the food you ate, the clothes you wore, and the fuel you used to get around—all are made possible by agriculture. The Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation is dedicated to raising awareness of agriculture’s vital role in both rural communities and urban areas across the state. Agriculture is part of our everyday lives. It starts on the farm and ranch,” McHargue added.The mission of the Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation is to engage youth, educators, and the general public to promote an understanding of the vital importance of agriculture in the lives of all Nebraskans. The Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. For more information about the Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation, visit&nbsp;<a href="http://www.nefbfoundation.org/" target="_blank">www.nefbfoundation.org</a>.&nbsp;

Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation Highlights Agriculture’s Economic Impact on Omaha and Nebraska

WASHINGTON— President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin held a high-stakes phone call Tuesday on the Ukraine-Russia war.

Shortly after the call, the White House released a brief summary of the conversation. It is below.

&nbsp;Today, President Trump and President Putin spoke about the need for peace and a ceasefire in the Ukraine war. Both leaders agreed this conflict needs to end with a lasting peace. They also stressed the need for improved bilateral relations between the United States and Russia.

The blood and treasure that both Ukraine and Russia have been spending in this war would be better spent on the needs of their people.
 
This conflict should never have started and should have been ended long ago with sincere and good faith peace efforts.

The leaders agreed that the movement to peace will begin with an energy and infrastructure ceasefire, as well as technical negotiations on implementation of a maritime ceasefire in the Black Sea, full ceasefire and permanent peace.

These negotiations will begin immediately in the Middle East. 
 
The leaders spoke broadly about the Middle East as a region of potential cooperation to prevent future conflicts. They further discussed the need to stop proliferation of strategic weapons and will engage with others to ensure the broadest possible application.

The two leaders shared the view that Iran should never be in a position to destroy Israel. 
 
The two leaders agreed that a future with an improved bilateral relationship between the United States and Russia has huge upside. This includes enormous economic deals and geopolitical stability when peace has been achieved.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1742207940676.png" alt="File photo President Trump discussed calling Putin during a flight from Florida to Washington on Sunday-image courtesy White House" />
 <figcaption>File photo President Trump discussed calling Putin during a flight from Florida to Washington on Sunday-image courtesy White House</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON— President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin held a high-stakes phone call Tuesday on the Ukraine-Russia war.Shortly after the call, the White House released a brief summary of the conversation. It is below.&nbsp;Today, President Trump and President Putin spoke about the need for peace and a ceasefire in the Ukraine war. Both leaders agreed this conflict needs to end with a lasting peace. They also stressed the need for improved bilateral relations between the United States and Russia. The blood and treasure that both Ukraine and Russia have been spending in this war would be better spent on the needs of their people.
 
This conflict should never have started and should have been ended long ago with sincere and good faith peace efforts. The leaders agreed that the movement to peace will begin with an energy and infrastructure ceasefire, as well as technical negotiations on implementation of a maritime ceasefire in the Black Sea, full ceasefire and permanent peace. These negotiations will begin immediately in the Middle East. 
 
The leaders spoke broadly about the Middle East as a region of potential cooperation to prevent future conflicts. They further discussed the need to stop proliferation of strategic weapons and will engage with others to ensure the broadest possible application. The two leaders shared the view that Iran should never be in a position to destroy Israel. 
 
The two leaders agreed that a future with an improved bilateral relationship between the United States and Russia has huge upside. This includes enormous economic deals and geopolitical stability when peace has been achieved.

See the readout : Trump and Putin discuss Ukraine-Russia ceasefire deal 

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/17/caregivers-rally-urge-nebraska-congressional-delegation-to-protect-medicaid/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN —&nbsp;The Nebraska Hospital Association and nearly 10 other organizations rallied Monday in defense of Medicaid ahead of federal budget negotiations.

Jeremy Nordquist, a former state senator and president of the Nebraska Hospital Association, led the rally on the west side of the Nebraska State Capitol on Monday. It came after the U.S. House last month passed a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/02/24/congress/mike-johnson-medicaid-cuts-00205771" target="_blank">budget blueprint</a>&nbsp;directing the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee, which&nbsp;<a href="https://www.eenews.net/articles/low-hanging-fruit-gop-puts-target-on-green-energy-after-budget-win/" target="_blank">oversees</a>&nbsp;Medicaid, to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.eenews.net/articles/reconciliation-senate-panel-rejects-energy-tweaks-house-plan-in-limbo/" target="_blank">reduce $880 billion in spending</a>&nbsp;over the next 10 years.

“Medicaid is under threat, and that means Nebraska and Nebraska patients are under threat,” Nordquist said.

The resolution doesn’t mention “Medicaid” by name, but the caregivers and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.eenews.net/articles/low-hanging-fruit-gop-puts-target-on-green-energy-after-budget-win/" target="_blank">outside observers</a>&nbsp;have said that with a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/medicaid-cover-congress-proposed-budget-cuts-felt-rcna193897" target="_blank">budget goal that high</a>, Medicaid spending would have to be reduced.&nbsp;

The Congressional Budget Office, in a March 5 letter replying to U.S. Reps. Brendan Boyle, D-Pa., and Frank Pallone, Jr., D-N.J., essentially confirmed that there isn’t enough non-Medicaid or Medicare spending to reach the targeted amount of cuts.

Medicaid costs over the next 10 years, estimated at $8.2 trillion, would account for about 93% of all spending under the House committee’s jurisdiction, excluding Medicare, which it estimated would account for $8.8 trillion over the same span.

Monday’s rally sought to highlight the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republicans-split-spending-cuts-medicaid-they-seek-path-forward-trump-tax-cuts-2025-03-16/" target="_blank">potential Medicaid cuts</a>&nbsp;that Nordquist said would touch all Nebraskans, even those who have commercial health coverage and might think, “I’m fine.”

“The reality is, without Medicaid covering care for vulnerable citizens and low-income workers, very little of that care would be paid for, and therefore those services would no longer be sustainable in communities across our state,” Nordquist said.

Nordquist and others asked Nebraska’s all-Republican&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-senate-gop-approved-competing-budget-plans-now-comes-hard-part-rcna193808" target="_blank">congressional delegation</a>&nbsp;—&nbsp;U.S. Reps. Mike Flood, Don Bacon and Adrian Smith and U.S. Sens. Deb Fischer and Pete Ricketts —&nbsp;to be “leaders” and “stand up to the efforts to jeopardize health care in our rural state.”

“We know our delegation understands these issues and how vulnerable access to care is across Nebraska,” Nordquist said. “Now it’s time for them to use that knowledge and push back against these proposed cuts.”

Bacon has voiced some concerns about potential Medicaid cuts but said he was assured by GOP leadership “that the final bill will not affect the quality of healthcare covered by Medicaid.”

“They all said the final numbers will be more moderate,” Bacon said in a&nbsp;<a href="https://bacon.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=2608" target="_blank">Feb. 25 statement</a>&nbsp;after his vote for the resolution. “We’ll have a chance to vote on these two more times to get it right. Therefore, I am supporting the budget reconciliation because I want to secure the border, expand our energy production, improve our military and extend the tax cuts.”

National and local Democrats have targeted Republicans, including Bacon, for the vote and vowed to use it in the 2026 election cycle. Bacon has fended off challengers in each of his past four election cycles.

“Don Bacon can spread all the falsehoods he wants, but there is no escaping the fact that the House Republican budget will result in massive cuts to Medicaid and hurt millions of families. Another fact: Their terrible, unpopular budget will cost Bacon his seat next year,” Justin Chermol, a spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said in a recent statement.

Among other organizations in attendance at the rally or supporting the call to action:

Dr. Robert Wergin, a family physician from Seward and president-elect of the Nebraska Medical Association, said physicians can’t “sit idly by” without making clear what is at stake.

“Cuts will hurt the entire health care system in Nebraska, and cuts will ultimately hurt all Nebraskans by decreasing access, increasing costs of health care and hurting our communities,” Wergin said.

Linda Hardy, a registered nurse for more than 48 years and president of the Nebraska Nurses Association, said 79 million Americans rely on Medicaid for health care. This includes preventive care for chronic diseases and prenatal or postpartum care.

Wergin said the “safety net” helps roughly 350,000 Nebraskans, including 180,000 children, and helps pay for care ranging from immunizations and dental care to speech and physical therapies.&nbsp;

Should Medicaid be cut, Wergin and others said it would lead to an elimination of services, exacerbating maternal health care deserts in Nebraska and would increase the burden on Nebraska’s already strained state budget. In a given year, Medicaid contributes $3 billion to the state economy, Wergin said.

Jed Hansen, executive director of the Nebraska Rural Health Association, said the cuts “aren’t just numbers on a budget sheet” and that in rural health care, it’s a “numbers game” where one cut could be the “final blow.”

Amy Behnke, chief executive officer of the Health Center Association of Nebraska, supporting seven community health centers, said Medicaid is integral to patient health and well-being.

Medicaid cuts would eat into services, Behnke said, leading to widespread reductions. Hansen said that when many services are eliminated they don’t come back.

“These cuts translate into real-life consequences: closed hospitals, shuttered clinics and rural families left without access to care that they need,” Hansen said.

Roger Reamer, chief executive officer of Memorial Health Care System in Seward, and Tami Lewis-Ahrendt, chief operating officer of the Lincoln-based nonprofit CenterPointe, also spoke of Medicaid’s importance.

Lewis-Ahrendt said the state’s voter-approved&nbsp;<a href="https://dhhs.ne.gov/Pages/Nebraska-Releases-Plan-for-Medicaid-Expansion.aspx" target="_blank">Medicaid expansion&nbsp;</a>in 2018 has helped the nonprofit provide critical care to 700 more people each month than in 2019. She said many Nebraskans were unable to access care before the expansion, with some delaying care until a crisis arose.

She said it’s not just “numbers on a report” but the “real people,” such as a mother accessing treatment for postpartum depression, a young adult getting support and medication for schizophrenia or an individual in recovery who finally has access to outpatient services.

“Access to Medicaid means more families can find hope in knowing that their loved ones are getting the care they desperately need,” Lewis-Ahrendt said.

Kierstin Reed, chief executive officer of LeadingAge Nebraska, said Medicaid cuts could be detrimental for nursing homes, assisted living facilities, home and community-based services and other post-acute programs.

Reed noted about half of Nebraskans enrolled in Medicaid live in rural communities that have been hit most by the state’s loss of 17% of nursing homes and 11% of assisted living facilities in recent years.

“Families will be forced to shoulder the burden of care for their older family members, which may lead to financial ruin for multiple generations,” Reed said.

Reed and Lewis-Ahrendt said Medicaid “isn’t just about policy.”

“It’s about giving Nebraskans the chance to heal, to thrive, to live in recovery and to contribute fully to our society,” Lewis-Ahrendt said. “That is something worth protecting.”

Zach Wendling<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/17/caregivers-rally-urge-nebraska-congressional-delegation-to-protect-medicaid/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN —&nbsp;The Nebraska Hospital Association and nearly 10 other organizations rallied Monday in defense of Medicaid ahead of federal budget negotiations.Jeremy Nordquist, a former state senator and president of the Nebraska Hospital Association, led the rally on the west side of the Nebraska State Capitol on Monday. It came after the U.S. House last month passed a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/02/24/congress/mike-johnson-medicaid-cuts-00205771" target="_blank">budget blueprint</a>&nbsp;directing the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee, which&nbsp;<a href="https://www.eenews.net/articles/low-hanging-fruit-gop-puts-target-on-green-energy-after-budget-win/" target="_blank">oversees</a>&nbsp;Medicaid, to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.eenews.net/articles/reconciliation-senate-panel-rejects-energy-tweaks-house-plan-in-limbo/" target="_blank">reduce $880 billion in spending</a>&nbsp;over the next 10 years.“Medicaid is under threat, and that means Nebraska and Nebraska patients are under threat,” Nordquist said.The resolution doesn’t mention “Medicaid” by name, but the caregivers and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.eenews.net/articles/low-hanging-fruit-gop-puts-target-on-green-energy-after-budget-win/" target="_blank">outside observers</a>&nbsp;have said that with a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/medicaid-cover-congress-proposed-budget-cuts-felt-rcna193897" target="_blank">budget goal that high</a>, Medicaid spending would have to be reduced.&nbsp;The Congressional Budget Office, in a March 5 letter replying to U.S. Reps. Brendan Boyle, D-Pa., and Frank Pallone, Jr., D-N.J., essentially confirmed that there isn’t enough non-Medicaid or Medicare spending to reach the targeted amount of cuts.Medicaid costs over the next 10 years, estimated at $8.2 trillion, would account for about 93% of all spending under the House committee’s jurisdiction, excluding Medicare, which it estimated would account for $8.8 trillion over the same span.Monday’s rally sought to highlight the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republicans-split-spending-cuts-medicaid-they-seek-path-forward-trump-tax-cuts-2025-03-16/" target="_blank">potential Medicaid cuts</a>&nbsp;that Nordquist said would touch all Nebraskans, even those who have commercial health coverage and might think, “I’m fine.”“The reality is, without Medicaid covering care for vulnerable citizens and low-income workers, very little of that care would be paid for, and therefore those services would no longer be sustainable in communities across our state,” Nordquist said.<h2>Nebraska federal delegation</h2>Nordquist and others asked Nebraska’s all-Republican&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-senate-gop-approved-competing-budget-plans-now-comes-hard-part-rcna193808" target="_blank">congressional delegation</a>&nbsp;—&nbsp;U.S. Reps. Mike Flood, Don Bacon and Adrian Smith and U.S. Sens. Deb Fischer and Pete Ricketts —&nbsp;to be “leaders” and “stand up to the efforts to jeopardize health care in our rural state.”“We know our delegation understands these issues and how vulnerable access to care is across Nebraska,” Nordquist said. “Now it’s time for them to use that knowledge and push back against these proposed cuts.”Bacon has voiced some concerns about potential Medicaid cuts but said he was assured by GOP leadership “that the final bill will not affect the quality of healthcare covered by Medicaid.”“They all said the final numbers will be more moderate,” Bacon said in a&nbsp;<a href="https://bacon.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=2608" target="_blank">Feb. 25 statement</a>&nbsp;after his vote for the resolution. “We’ll have a chance to vote on these two more times to get it right. Therefore, I am supporting the budget reconciliation because I want to secure the border, expand our energy production, improve our military and extend the tax cuts.”National and local Democrats have targeted Republicans, including Bacon, for the vote and vowed to use it in the 2026 election cycle. Bacon has fended off challengers in each of his past four election cycles.“Don Bacon can spread all the falsehoods he wants, but there is no escaping the fact that the House Republican budget will result in massive cuts to Medicaid and hurt millions of families. Another fact: Their terrible, unpopular budget will cost Bacon his seat next year,” Justin Chermol, a spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said in a recent statement.<h2>Organizations join call to action</h2>Among other organizations in attendance at the rally or supporting the call to action:<ul>
 <li>Nebraska Medical Association.</li><li>Nebraska Nurses Association.</li><li>LeadingAge Nebraska.</li><li>Health Center Association of Nebraska.</li><li>Nebraska Association of Behavioral Health Organizations.</li><li>Nebraska Rural Health Association.</li><li>Nebraska Nurse Practitioners.</li><li>Nebraska Pharmacists Association.</li><li>Nebraska Home Care Association.</li>
 </ul>Dr. Robert Wergin, a family physician from Seward and president-elect of the Nebraska Medical Association, said physicians can’t “sit idly by” without making clear what is at stake.“Cuts will hurt the entire health care system in Nebraska, and cuts will ultimately hurt all Nebraskans by decreasing access, increasing costs of health care and hurting our communities,” Wergin said.Linda Hardy, a registered nurse for more than 48 years and president of the Nebraska Nurses Association, said 79 million Americans rely on Medicaid for health care. This includes preventive care for chronic diseases and prenatal or postpartum care.Wergin said the “safety net” helps roughly 350,000 Nebraskans, including 180,000 children, and helps pay for care ranging from immunizations and dental care to speech and physical therapies.&nbsp;Should Medicaid be cut, Wergin and others said it would lead to an elimination of services, exacerbating maternal health care deserts in Nebraska and would increase the burden on Nebraska’s already strained state budget. In a given year, Medicaid contributes $3 billion to the state economy, Wergin said.<h2>Impact to services</h2>Jed Hansen, executive director of the Nebraska Rural Health Association, said the cuts “aren’t just numbers on a budget sheet” and that in rural health care, it’s a “numbers game” where one cut could be the “final blow.”Amy Behnke, chief executive officer of the Health Center Association of Nebraska, supporting seven community health centers, said Medicaid is integral to patient health and well-being.Medicaid cuts would eat into services, Behnke said, leading to widespread reductions. Hansen said that when many services are eliminated they don’t come back.“These cuts translate into real-life consequences: closed hospitals, shuttered clinics and rural families left without access to care that they need,” Hansen said.<h2>‘Isn’t just about policy’</h2>Roger Reamer, chief executive officer of Memorial Health Care System in Seward, and Tami Lewis-Ahrendt, chief operating officer of the Lincoln-based nonprofit CenterPointe, also spoke of Medicaid’s importance.Lewis-Ahrendt said the state’s voter-approved&nbsp;<a href="https://dhhs.ne.gov/Pages/Nebraska-Releases-Plan-for-Medicaid-Expansion.aspx" target="_blank">Medicaid expansion&nbsp;</a>in 2018 has helped the nonprofit provide critical care to 700 more people each month than in 2019. She said many Nebraskans were unable to access care before the expansion, with some delaying care until a crisis arose.She said it’s not just “numbers on a report” but the “real people,” such as a mother accessing treatment for postpartum depression, a young adult getting support and medication for schizophrenia or an individual in recovery who finally has access to outpatient services.“Access to Medicaid means more families can find hope in knowing that their loved ones are getting the care they desperately need,” Lewis-Ahrendt said.Kierstin Reed, chief executive officer of LeadingAge Nebraska, said Medicaid cuts could be detrimental for nursing homes, assisted living facilities, home and community-based services and other post-acute programs.Reed noted about half of Nebraskans enrolled in Medicaid live in rural communities that have been hit most by the state’s loss of 17% of nursing homes and 11% of assisted living facilities in recent years.“Families will be forced to shoulder the burden of care for their older family members, which may lead to financial ruin for multiple generations,” Reed said.Reed and Lewis-Ahrendt said Medicaid “isn’t just about policy.”“It’s about giving Nebraskans the chance to heal, to thrive, to live in recovery and to contribute fully to our society,” Lewis-Ahrendt said. “That is something worth protecting.”

Caregivers rally, urge Nebraskans in Congress to protect Medicaid

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/15/bill-to-benefit-nebraska-immigrant-dreamers-squashed-after-trump-order/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — A proposed Nebraska law that had bipartisan support and would have benefited immigrant “Dreamers” has been crushed under the weight of a Trump administration threat that the state could lose hundreds of millions of dollars in federal aid.

<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/Intro/LB299.pdf" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 299</a>, in part, sought to align Nebraska with what advocates said already had been the practice of most, if not all, other states: allowing immigrants who have legal permission to work in the U.S. but lack permanent residency access to the unemployment insurance benefits their employers pay into.

Before the bill’s sponsors backed off Thursday, LB 299 had cleared a few key hurdles, including a March 6 vote by the Legislature’s Business and Labor Committee that poised the measure for debate by the state’s full lawmaking body.

But a Feb. 19&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/ending-taxpayer-subsidization-of-open-borders/" target="_blank">executive order</a>&nbsp;from President Donald Trump titled “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders” has since come into play.&nbsp;

State Sen. Teresa Ibach of Sumner withdrew her name Thursday from the bill. Co-sponsor State Sen. Margo Juarez of Omaha said she saw no alternative but to drop the effort this year.

Proponents said they were maddened by the latest twist for the proposed law that had gained support from a range of business and civic groups.&nbsp;

A leader of the religious coalition Omaha Together One Community told the Nebraska Examiner on Friday that its members are “outraged.”

“The fact that the federal government would swoop in and block a bill that clearly represented the will of Nebraskans is a blatant insult to our state and should not be tolerated,” said Kathleen Grant.&nbsp;

Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen’s spokesperson, Laura Strimple, said Friday that the governor was pleased with the recent turn of events.&nbsp;

“Governor Pillen strongly opposes giving taxpayer benefits to illegal aliens and is pleased the Legislature will not act on this bill further this session,” she said.

LB 299 sponsors said the bill primarily would have impacted so-called “Dreamers,” who grew up in the U.S. after being brought here illegally as minors by their parents and who obtained legal permission, under the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, to work and live in the country.&nbsp;

DACA recipients don’t have permanent residency, and the program has been challenged in court.

LB 299, they said, also was designed to benefit asylum-seekers who have been granted work authorization while their requests are reviewed and others with Temporary Protected Status, which is granted when returning to a person’s home country is unsafe due to natural disaster, extraordinary conditions or war.

While advocates have mostly focused on opening the door to unemployment benefits, the bill called for “eligible aliens” who are employed in Nebraska to have access to the same public employment benefits offered to any other similarly situated employee, with a few exceptions. Access included participation in certain public retirement and deferred compensation programs.

There’s no way I can fight a threat like that.

– State Sen. Margo Juarez of Omaha

The 6-0 legislative committee vote that pushed the bill to the debate stage came after state and federal labor officials had resolved what Ibach described last week as a “technical” problem with the bill.

The concern was raised during a&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/02/10/nebraska-lawmakers-hear-support-for-opening-unemployment-insurance-to-immigrant-dreamers/">Feb. 10 public hearing</a>. Nebraska Labor Commissioner Katie Thurber told lawmakers that LB 299, as then drafted, could cost the state more than $400 million in federal tax credits.&nbsp;

She said the original language was too broad, created a new state definition for “eligible alien” and would allow benefits even if the immigrant lost legal authorization to work in the U.S.

Ibach and Juarez believed that&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/bill-to-open-unemployment-benefits-to-immigrant-dreamers-advances-to-legislative-debate/">the path had been smoothed</a>&nbsp;— until, they said, a federal labor official reached out to the state Labor Department and Pillen’s office this week, bringing up the Feb. 19 executive order.&nbsp;

Juarez said she was caught off guard and was told that millions of dollars were at risk. “There’s no way I can fight a threat like that.”

Cindy Gonzalez<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/15/bill-to-benefit-nebraska-immigrant-dreamers-squashed-after-trump-order/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — A proposed Nebraska law that had bipartisan support and would have benefited immigrant “Dreamers” has been crushed under the weight of a Trump administration threat that the state could lose hundreds of millions of dollars in federal aid.<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/Intro/LB299.pdf" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 299</a>, in part, sought to align Nebraska with what advocates said already had been the practice of most, if not all, other states: allowing immigrants who have legal permission to work in the U.S. but lack permanent residency access to the unemployment insurance benefits their employers pay into.Before the bill’s sponsors backed off Thursday, LB 299 had cleared a few key hurdles, including a March 6 vote by the Legislature’s Business and Labor Committee that poised the measure for debate by the state’s full lawmaking body.But a Feb. 19&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/ending-taxpayer-subsidization-of-open-borders/" target="_blank">executive order</a>&nbsp;from President Donald Trump titled “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders” has since come into play.&nbsp;<h2>‘Outraged’</h2>State Sen. Teresa Ibach of Sumner withdrew her name Thursday from the bill. Co-sponsor State Sen. Margo Juarez of Omaha said she saw no alternative but to drop the effort this year.Proponents said they were maddened by the latest twist for the proposed law that had gained support from a range of business and civic groups.&nbsp;A leader of the religious coalition Omaha Together One Community told the Nebraska Examiner on Friday that its members are “outraged.”“The fact that the federal government would swoop in and block a bill that clearly represented the will of Nebraskans is a blatant insult to our state and should not be tolerated,” said Kathleen Grant.&nbsp;Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen’s spokesperson, Laura Strimple, said Friday that the governor was pleased with the recent turn of events.&nbsp;“Governor Pillen strongly opposes giving taxpayer benefits to illegal aliens and is pleased the Legislature will not act on this bill further this session,” she said.<h2>‘Technical’ problem</h2>LB 299 sponsors said the bill primarily would have impacted so-called “Dreamers,” who grew up in the U.S. after being brought here illegally as minors by their parents and who obtained legal permission, under the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, to work and live in the country.&nbsp;DACA recipients don’t have permanent residency, and the program has been challenged in court.LB 299, they said, also was designed to benefit asylum-seekers who have been granted work authorization while their requests are reviewed and others with Temporary Protected Status, which is granted when returning to a person’s home country is unsafe due to natural disaster, extraordinary conditions or war.While advocates have mostly focused on opening the door to unemployment benefits, the bill called for “eligible aliens” who are employed in Nebraska to have access to the same public employment benefits offered to any other similarly situated employee, with a few exceptions. Access included participation in certain public retirement and deferred compensation programs.There’s no way I can fight a threat like that.– State Sen. Margo Juarez of OmahaThe 6-0 legislative committee vote that pushed the bill to the debate stage came after state and federal labor officials had resolved what Ibach described last week as a “technical” problem with the bill.The concern was raised during a&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/02/10/nebraska-lawmakers-hear-support-for-opening-unemployment-insurance-to-immigrant-dreamers/">Feb. 10 public hearing</a>. Nebraska Labor Commissioner Katie Thurber told lawmakers that LB 299, as then drafted, could cost the state more than $400 million in federal tax credits.&nbsp;She said the original language was too broad, created a new state definition for “eligible alien” and would allow benefits even if the immigrant lost legal authorization to work in the U.S.Ibach and Juarez believed that&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/bill-to-open-unemployment-benefits-to-immigrant-dreamers-advances-to-legislative-debate/">the path had been smoothed</a>&nbsp;— until, they said, a federal labor official reached out to the state Labor Department and Pillen’s office this week, bringing up the Feb. 19 executive order.&nbsp;Juarez said she was caught off guard and was told that millions of dollars were at risk. “There’s no way I can fight a threat like that.”<h2>Situation grew ‘complicated’</h2>Thurber, in a statement to the Examiner on Friday, said that while an amendment addressed an initial concern, “the situation has become complicated with recently proposed federal actions.”She said, for example, the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services on March 10 issued a proposed rule removing DACA recipients from the definition of “lawfully present” for the purposes of eligibility under the Affordable Care Act. “This coupled with the executive order from President Trump … makes it clear that extending benefits to illegal immigrants, including DACA recipients, is in direct conflict with federal policy.”Thurber said the bill “poses significant risk that Nebraska’s unemployment insurance system could face consequences if it goes against federal directives” aimed at illegal immigration.The Trump order, citing a 1996 federal law, said the law “generally prohibits illegal aliens from obtaining most taxpayer-funded benefits.”The directive gave federal agencies and the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, 30 days to identify federally-funded programs that “permit illegal aliens to obtain any cash or non-cash public benefit.”&nbsp;Ibach said she retreated from LB 299 after Pillen’s staff alerted her to the executive order and potential fallout.&nbsp;“We were disappointed but thankful the Governor’s Office called our attention to the reality of how LB 299 was going to be framed going forward,” she said.Nick Grandgenett, an attorney with Nebraska Appleseed, views the executive order as applicable to federal public benefits and said the proposed legislation pertained to state employment benefits.“It really is outside the scope of that executive order,” he said.But adding the Trump order to an already complex marriage of immigration and employment systems muddies the waters, he said.“I don’t think there is truly a problem with the bill,” Grandgenett said. “The confusion is kind of winning the day.”<h2>‘Really bad place’</h2>State Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha said the situation signals trouble for Nebraska. She characterized LB 299 as an important bill with bipartisan support and challenged Nebraska Republican officials at all levels of government to stand up.“When we have people in leadership not standing up for vulnerable populations like those covered in this bill, then we are going to be in a really bad place,” she said.Representatives of organizations such as the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Nebraska Catholic Conference, and the Nebraska Alliance for Thriving Communities spoke in support of the bill during the public hearing. The alliance is a coalition that includes labor unions, hospitals, banks, cattlemen and pork producers.Ibach sees the effort as dead for now, unless labor officials can find a path forward. She said she’d continue to work on immigration and DACA reform.Juarez said she had made LB 299 her priority bill because she felt strongly that the targeted immigrant populations working with U.S. authorization deserved access to benefits — and that Nebraska businesses needed their talent.&nbsp;She said she is left “extremely frustrated,” but won’t give up and hopes for a revival during a different legislative session.