Week of February 3, 2025
Winner Take All Mostly Opposed
On Thursday, the Government, Military, and Veterans Affairs committee held its first high-profile, nationally-watched hearing of the year on two proposals to convert Nebraska’s split presidential electoral vote allocation system into one in which the “winner takes all” like 48 of our fellow states currently use. In over five hours of testimony from 75+ people, an overwhelming majority spoke in opposition to the proposals and in favor of maintaining the current system, which has allowed for Omaha’s “blue dot” vote to be cast differently than the rest of the state’s in a handful of recent elections.
Sen. Lippincott’s LB 3 would award all five of Nebraska’s electoral votes to the statewide winner of the popular vote for president through legislative approval alone, whereas Sen. Dorn’s LR24CA would do the same, but submit the question to voters on the ballot. Dorn has said he supports Lippincott’s bill, but offered his measure as a backstop of sorts should LB 3 fail to advance. Gov. Pillen and his policy advisors have spoken against Dorn’s approach, saying passing a constitutional amendment would make it too difficult to change again in the future if necessary – but their real concern with this method is probably an awareness that if voters are given a chance to weigh in, especially CD2 voters, it’s much less likely to pass.
This year’s hearing on the issue was markedly different from past attempts, when small numbers of testifiers turned out to speak with little fanfare from the media. The halls of the Capitol were abuzz on Thursday, with long lines running down the hall and some waiting in overflow rooms or even leaving before they could speak due to long wait times.
Proponents of Winner Take All say that now is a great time to try again: with no pressure of a presidential election around the corner, a more thoughtful and measured debate on the policy can be had. While the Republican Party has been trying to undo the split system since it was passed in the 90’s, recent attempts have flown mostly under the radar until late last session when then-candidate Trump and Gov. Pillen suddenly made a push for the previous Lippincott bill, which had until that point languished in committee. Those efforts spurred a continued debate on the issue through the rest of the year that was elevated to the national stage.
If you’re wondering why this is suddenly such “a thing” now, there are a few quiet parts that proponents haven’t directly said but which are quite apparent with a little reading between the lines:
- Now that it’s caught President Trump’s attention, he’s not apt to easily let go of the perceived slight against him of losing CD2 in mostly-red Nebraska;
- A desire to capitalize on national public (conservative) interest that was built around this issue in last November’s election when many eyes were on CD2 as possibly swaying the results in one direction or another; and
- With a new legislative body that’s looking more firmly conservative, wanting to strike while the iron is hot (e.g., in hopes the votes could be there that weren’t last session and may not be in a future body). One legislator being eyed as a potential “swing vote” is newcomer & Government Committee member Sen. Wordekemper of Fremont. He has made statements and posts on the issue indicating he might think our system is not in need of changing, but will undoubtedly be under enormous pressure to vote with his majority colleagues.
State of the Judiciary
New Chief Justice Jeffrey Funke, delivering his first address to lawmakers following his appointment after Mike Heavican’s retirement late last year, praised parts of the state’s court system that are working well to reduce recidivism and costs to taxpayers, including diversion and reentry programs like probation, post-release supervision and problem-solving courts. He noted, however, that our prison overcrowding problem remains among the most severe in the nation, and that incarceration rates are increasing while the state’s crime rate is decreasing.
His “asks” to lawmakers included funding for some notable areas:
- “Access to Justice”: He said more robust and sustainable funding is needed from the legislature for: court interpreter services for the over 60 different languages spoken by the public served in our courts; installing assisted listening devices in courtrooms for those with hearing challenges; enhancing the virtual courtroom experience for those with travel or transport challenges; and tech updates to the online JUSTICE case management system to make it more efficient to navigate for the public, attorneys, and judges.
- Behavioral Health Funding: He noted that many Nebraskans become involved with the judicial system due to unmet behavioral health treatment needs, and many re-entering communities under probation struggle to access and afford needed behavioral health services. This is exacerbated by a shortage of available providers and inadequate reimbursement rates, he said.
Overall, many of us were impressed by his remarks, and noted with interest that despite being a recent Pillen appointee, he didn’t hesitate to highlight these areas of need – some of which are in direct conflict with some of the actions Pillen has taken or tried to take in his time as Governor.
Speaker’s Announcement on Cloture Procedure
Speaker Arch announced his guidelines for extended debate and cloture motions. If you’ve been around, nothing has really changed, but here’s a summary:
He reserves the right to distinguish between two categories of bills. The vast majority of bills will follow the traditional 8, 4, and 2 hours for “full & fair” debate on General, Select, and Final Reading for a Cloture motion to be in order.
The second, rarer category is “controversial and emotionally charged legislation”- bills for which he says extended debate will not lead to better understanding or compromise, only causing more contention and not providing additional value. For these bills he may use a shorter hour threshold of 4-2-1 for full and fair debate, and these will be identified for the body prior to General File debate.
What’s Next
We continue with morning debate of worksheet order bills and afternoon hearings. The most notable and high-profile hearing of the week is Friday’s scheduled hearing on LB89, the “Stand with Women Act”, or the extremist anti-trans bill (Kauth).
