We’re off to the races with what is shaping up to be possibly one of the most contentious legislative sessions of this Fly’s tenure in the Capitol. With a huge volume of legislative bills, constitutional amendments, and resolutions introduced – nearly 500 – ready or not, legislators will need to roll up their sleeves for late nights and long battles ahead. This number is unusually high, especially for a year with so many new members, who typically don’t have any experience legislating and thus usually introduce fewer bills.
Early in the week, senators ceased debating about the Committee on Committees’ selection process, finally coming to a vote to “adopt the Committee’s report”, meaning the legislature now officially has committee memberships and chairmanships settled for the next two years. Though they agreed to move on, those senators that had raised concerns with the process gave us a taste of their ability and willingness to wield the floor to stall proceedings over perceived undoings of institutional norms, which we’re likely to see more of in the coming months.
On Thursday, Governor Pillen made his long-awaited announcement of who he would be appointing to hold the U.S. Senate Seat vacated by former Sen. Ben Sasse. To the surprise of nearly no one, former Governor Pete Ricketts was tapped as Sasse’s successor, despite Pillen’s repeated insistence that he would be making the choice in a fair and unbiased manner. I won’t speculate on the conditions surrounding that decision here, but as you might see swirling around social media, it does raise questions from a legislative perspective about how independent and fair-minded new Governor Pillen will be in comparison to his predecessor. This could impact which bills he will throw his support behind (by way of lobbying from his Policy Research Office), or which bills he might veto. Time will tell.
Rules Hearing
Thursday saw what’s likely the first of many marathon hearings this year over an unprecedented 58 rules proposals, which kept Rules committee members and testifiers from 1:30 in the afternoon until 10:30 that night. A number of conclusions can be drawn from the volume of rules proposals and the high level of public participation at the hearing. I’ll speculate that the high number of proposed rules is due to a combination of good faith efforts to make substantive changes to the rules; and an effort by some senators to flood the field with proposals they may be less serious about. Possible reasons for the latter could be to make a point about perceived frivolity of some of the other proposed rule changes; to slow the legislative process and wear down opposing senators; to provide ample opportunity for public input on the importance of preserving the nonpartisan norms and nature of the institution; and/or to generally jam up the session to gain some leverage over and/or stall measures that they perceive as unacceptable.
Rules proposals that appeared to capture the most public attention were: one to do away with the secret ballot process for electing committee chairs, one to allow the legislature to contemplate the disparate impact legislative bills could have on different communities with “racial impact statements’, and one to remove the Opening Prayer as an official part of the daily legislative agenda. Given the enormous public turnout for this hearing, and the stamina of many of those that stayed well into the evening to testify on multiple measures, it’s clear that the Second House is fired up and ready to make their voices heard on both sides of many issues this year.
Early this week the Rules Committee will meet to develop a report on which measures they’ll choose to advance to the floor for debate. I’m guessing only a handful of those proposed measures will make the cut. Senators will still have the option to bring rule proposals on the floor for discussion, but that avenue is typically not preferred because the body is historically less apt to advance rule changes that have not had a public hearing.
Bill Introduction
The Revisor of Statutes office, known around here as “bill drafters”, has communicated to senators that they’ve been overwhelmed with nearly 2000 requests for new bills this year, many of those received in the later part of the 10-day window during which bills can be introduced. This could mean new legislators are being handed requests to bring bills from lobbyists and special interest groups at the last minute – and often, last minute bills haven’t been thoroughly researched and vetted.
Friday was the deadline for senators to request new bills to be drafted by the Revisors’ office, and Wednesday is Day 10: the final day for bill introduction for the year. With Monday’s state holiday for Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, that leaves Tuesday and Wednesday for new bills to be dropped. If the pattern holds, there’s an interesting ratio emerging in an unusually high number of draft requests to bills introduced. Perhaps this means that senators are letting go of some half-baked ideas, or, maybe they have realized they don’t have the support for a given measure in this new hyperpolarized body.
I’ll make a list of what could be of interest from a CSN perspective next week once we’ve had time to digest everything that’s introduced. A few doozies that you may have heard buzz about this week: A bill (LB 371) to criminalize minors’ participation in or attendance at drag performances from Sen. Erdman, which broadly defines the term “drag” and which has some concerned about its impact on school theater performances; A trio of constitutional amendments designed to enshrine abortion rights in the State constitution that’ll be up to the voters, from Sens. Hunt and Conrad (LR 18CA, LR 19CA, and LR 20CA); and a proposal to do away with the State Board of Education and give the Governor power to appoint a Commissioner of Education from Sen. Albrecht (LR 24CA). If any of these make it to the floor, I expect them to see extended debate.
Until Next Week,
Your Capitol Fly on the Wall
