logo
15 quiet casualties of the 2025 legislative session

15 quiet casualties of the 2025 legislative session

Yahoo06-06-2025
(Photo: April Corbin Girnus/Nevada Current)
The pharmaceutical middlemen who play a role in inflating consumer drug prices escaped additional regulations by state lawmakers, after the Nevada State Legislature failed to pass a bill designed to curb how much profit they can make.
Democratic state Sen. Rochelle Nguyen's Senate Bill 316 would have established 'guardrails' for pharmaceutical benefit managers, such as requiring PBMs to pass along to consumers rebate savings they receive from the drug companies. Nguyen led the legislative effort but a bipartisan group of eight other lawmakers signed on, including Republican state Sen. Jeff Stone, a pharmacist, and Senate Minority Leader Robin Titus, a medical doctor.
The Senate and Assembly passed different versions of SB216, both with broad bipartisan support. Only Democratic state Sens. Dina Neal and Fabian Donate opposed. However, those votes came in the waning days of the legislative session, and the Senate did not get around to voting on whether to accept the Assembly's amendments.
Here are 14 other bills the Nevada Current has covered that fell short (or really far) from becoming law during the 2025 Legislative Session.
Pet store ban. Assembly Bill 487 originally sought to ban retail pet sales statewide, following the lead of several municipalities that banned them within their borders. The bill, sponsored by Democratic Assemblymember Natha Anderson, passed the Assembly with bipartisan support. It appeared stalled in the Senate but, right before a key deadline, was heard by a Senate committee and amended into a study bill. When it returned to the Assembly for concurrence, Anderson moved for the chamber to reject the amendment. A trio of lawmakers from both chambers were chosen for what's known as a 'conference committee' to try and reconcile the differences between the chambers. But it appears no action was taken. That means retail pet sales remain legal in municipalities without bans.
Education management organizations. Senate Bill 318 (State Sen. Skip Daly, D) would have banned charter schools from contracting with for-profit education management organizations. The bill passed the Senate on party lines, with all Republicans opposing. It was referred to the Assembly Education Committee but was never given a hearing. That committee is chaired by Assemblymember Selena Torres-Fossett, who is also the executive director of a Las Vegas charter school contracted with Academica, the largest EMO in the state.
Third-party ticket vendors. Senate Bill 431 originally attempted to remove an exemption Nevada-based sports teams have from the state's 8% live entertainment tax on tickets. That is an effort Democratic state Sen. Dina Neal has pushed in prior sessions. This year, the bill was amended into a bill to apply LET to tickets resold by third-party vendors like StubHub. Some of the funding would have supported public transit. The amended bill passed the Assembly with bipartisan support but was never given a floor vote in the Senate.
Farm worker protections. Senate Bill 172 (State Sen. Edgar Flores, D) sought to bolster protections for farm workers and amend overtime pay laws to include agriculture workers. The bill passed the Senate on party lines, with all Republicans opposing, but got stuck in the Assembly.
Free phone calls for prisoners. Senate Bill 323 (State Sen. Melanie Scheible, D) would have created a pilot program to provide free phone calls at Florence McClure Women's Correctional Center. The bill passed the Senate with 20-0, with one senator excused from the vote, but died on the Assembly side.
Traffic cams in construction zones. Assembly Bill 402 (Assemblymember Selena Torres-Fossett, D) would have authorized traffic monitoring cameras in construction work zones when workers are present. The bill passed the Assembly with some bipartisan support, but then got stuck in the Senate Finance Committee. It was one of two 'red light camera' bills introduced into the session this year. The other missed a legislative deadline earlier in the session.
Prison food study. Assembly Bill 246 (Assemblymember Venicia Considine, D) proposed a study on food quality, waste and nutrition within Nevada Department of Corrections prisons. The bill was considered and passed by the Assembly Judiciary Committee, but died in the chamber's Ways & Means Committee.
Graduate assistant unions. Assembly Bill 191 (Assemblymember Natha Anderson, D) would have given graduate assistants the right to collectively bargain for better pay and conditions. The bill got stuck in the Assembly Ways & Means Committee.
Commerce tax. Assembly Bill 276 (Assemblymember P.K. O'Neill, R) would have adjusted the commerce tax threshold to inflation. The bill got stuck in the Assembly Ways & Means Committee.
Weight-loss drugs. Senate Bill 244 (State Sen. Roberta Lange, D) would have expanded the types of obesity treatments covered by Nevada Medicaid, including approving weight-loss drugs like Ozempic for wider use. The bill got stuck in the Senate Finance Committee.
'Second Look' Assembly Bill 91 (Assemblymember Erica Roth, D) is known as 'second look' legislation and would have created an avenue for those incarcerated to have sentences reviewed by the State Board of Parole Commissioners after they've served extended periods of time. The bill passed the Assembly on party lines, then died in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Lombardo's health care bill Senate Bill 495, known as the Nevada Health Care Access Act, was Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo's health care bill. It passed the Senate on party lines, with Senate Minority Leader Robin Titus urging her caucus to oppose the bill over amendments added by Democrats related to freestanding emergency rooms. The Assembly did not vote on the bill.
SNAP app. Assembly Bill 474 would have required DWSS to create a 'Smart Surplus Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.' The bill was criticized by local food banks, but passed the Assembly 40-1. Only Democratic Assemblymember Venicia Considine opposed. It was heard by the Senate Health and Human Services Committee but never voted out.
Artificial intelligence. Senate Bill 199 (State Sen. Dina Neal, D) would establish guardrails around artificial intelligence. The bill passed out of a Senate committee in early April but saw no activity after that.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump administration to keep DC police chief in place, but under immigration enforcement order
Trump administration to keep DC police chief in place, but under immigration enforcement order

Chicago Tribune

time16 minutes ago

  • Chicago Tribune

Trump administration to keep DC police chief in place, but under immigration enforcement order

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration on Friday reversed course and agreed to leave the Washington, D.C., police chief in control of the department, while Attorney General Pam Bondi, in a new memo, directed the District's police to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement regardless of any city law. The order from Bondi came after officials in the nation's capital sued Friday to block President Donald Trump's takeover of the Washington police. The night before, his administration had escalated its intervention into the city's law enforcement by naming a federal official as the new emergency head of the department, essentially placing the police force under the full control of the federal government. The attorney general's new order represents a partial retreat for the Trump administration in the face of intense skepticism from a judge over the legality of Bondi's earlier directive. But Bondi also signaled the administration would continue to pressure D.C. leaders to help federal authorities aggressively pursue immigrants in the country illegally, despite city laws on the books that limit cooperation between police and immigration authorities. In a social media post Friday evening, Bondi criticized D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb, saying he 'continues to oppose our efforts to improve public safety.' But she added, 'We remain committed to working closely with Mayor Bowser.' Mayor Muriel Bowser's office said late Friday that it was still evaluating how it can comply with the new Bondi order on immigration enforcement operations. The police department already eased some restrictions on cooperating with federal officials facilitating Trump's mass-deportation campaign but reaffirmed that it would follow the district's sanctuary city laws. In a letter sent Friday night to D.C. citizens, Bowser wrote: 'It has been an unsettling and unprecedented week in our city. Over the course of a week, the surge in federal law enforcement across D.C. has created waves of anxiety.' She added that 'our limited self-government has never faced the type of test we are facing right now,' but added that if Washingtonians stick together, 'we will show the entire nation what it looks like to fight for American democracy – even when we don't have full access to it.' The legal battle was the latest evidence of the escalating tensions in a mostly Democratic city that now has its police department largely under the control of the Republican president's administration. Trump's takeover is historic, yet it had played out with a slow ramp-up in federal law enforcement officials and National Guard troops to start the week. As the weekend approached, though, signs across the city — from the streets to the legal system — suggested a deepening crisis over who controls the city's immigration and policing policies, the district's right to govern itself and daily life for the millions of people who live and work in the metro area. The two sides sparred in court for hours Friday before U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, who is overseeing the district's lawsuit. She indicated the law likely doesn't grant the Trump administration power to fully take over city police, but it probably does give the president more power than the city might like. 'The way I read the statute, the president can ask, the mayor must provide, but the president can't control,' said Reyes, who was nominated to the bench by Democratic President Joe Biden. The judge pushed the two sides to make a compromise. An attorney for the Trump administration, Yaakov Roth, said the move to sideline Metropolitan Police Department Chief Pamela Smith came after an immigration order that still held back some aid to federal authorities. He argued that the president has broad authority to determine what kind of help police in Washington must provide. The police takeover is the latest move by Trump to test the limits of his legal authorities to carry out his agenda, relying on obscure statutes and a supposed state of emergency to bolster his tough-on-crime message and his plans to speed up the mass deportation of people in the United States illegally. It also marks one of the most sweeping assertions of federal authority over a local government in modern times. While Washington has grappled with spikes in violence and visible homelessness, the city's homicide rate ranks below those of several other major U.S. cities, and the capital is not in the throes of the public safety collapse the Trump administration has portrayed. The president has more power over the nation's capital than other cities, but D.C. has elected its own mayor and city council since the Home Rule Act was signed in 1973. Trump is the first president to exert control over the city's police force since it was passed. The law limits that control to 30 days without congressional approval, though Trump has suggested he'd seek to extend it. Bondi's Thursday night directive to place the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, Terry Cole, in charge of the police department came even after Smith had told MPD officers hours earlier to share information with immigration agencies regarding people not in custody, such as someone involved in a traffic stop or checkpoint. The Justice Department said Bondi disagreed with the police chief's instructions because they allowed for continued practice of 'sanctuary policies,' which generally limit cooperation by local law enforcement with federal immigration officers. Meanwhile, advocates in Washington were trying to advise immigrants on how to respond. Anusce Sanai, associate legal director for the Washington-based immigrant nonprofit Ayuda, said they're still parsing the legal aspects of the policies. 'Even with the most anti-immigrant administration, we would always tell our clients that they must call the police, that they should call the police,' Sanai said. 'But now we find ourselves that we have to be very careful on what we advise.' Amy Fischer, an organizer with Migrant Solidarity Mutual Aid, said that before the federal takeover, most of what they had seen in the nation's capital was Immigration and Customs Enforcement targeting specific individuals. But since last Friday night they've seen a 'really significant change,' she said, with ICE and federal officers doing roving patrols around the city. She said a hotline set up by immigration advocates to report ICE activity 'is receiving calls almost off the hook.' ICE said in a post on X that their teams had arrested 'several' people in Washington Friday. A video posted on X showed two uniformed personnel putting handcuffs on someone while standing outside a white transport van. A population already tense from days of ramp-up has begun seeing more significant shows of force across the city. National Guard troops watched over some of the world's most renowned landmarks, and Humvees took position in front of the busy main train station. Volunteers helped homeless people leave long-standing encampments — to where was often unclear. Friday night along the district's U Street, a popular nightlife corridor, an Associated Press photographer saw officers from the FBI, the DEA, the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Park Police, U.S. Marshals and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. As the District challenged the Trump administration in court Friday, more than 100 protesters gathered less than a block away in front of police headquarters, chanting 'Protect home rule!' and waving signs saying 'Resist!'

Trump offers Putin, Zelensky contrasting approaches
Trump offers Putin, Zelensky contrasting approaches

USA Today

time40 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Trump offers Putin, Zelensky contrasting approaches

President Donald Trump has offered his critics, the world and U.S. allies contrasting images on how America treats its friends and adversaries after failing to broker a ceasefire in Russia's unprovoked war to annex Ukraine. At the Alaska-based summit Russian President Vladimir Putin received a red-carpet welcome from the U.S. that included a B-2 bomber fly-by and a ride in the presidential limousine, nicknamed "The Beast" with video of him laughing with Trump. The two superpower leaders exchanged flatteries, with Putin saying the war wouldn't have started it Trump had been president in 2022. Andrei Gurulyov, a Russian parliament member and retired general, described it as a "breakthrough" moment that was played up heavily on Russian state television. Putin's foreign ministry said it marked an end to the foreign country's reported isolation. That showcase is in sharp contrast to a fiery exchange Trump and top administration officials had earlier this year with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy when the foreign ally's leader was told in the Oval Office he was being disrespectful to the U.S. and risking World War III. Zelenskyy was teased by Trump and others for his attire and eventually booted from the White House. Republican lawmakers, such as Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., suggested Ukraine's president should either resign, change his tune or "send somebody over that we can do business with." The administration went as far to pause intelligence sharing and weapons shipments to Ukraine after the incident, and while Trump has threatened to impose sharp economic penalties on Russian if an agreement to end the war wasn't reached, he suspended those sanctions after the Alaska sit-down with Putin. Now, Trump is poised to welcome Zelenskyy back to Washington on August 18 to discuss a peace agreement. Republican praise Trump's strength, Dems fret 'it was just theater' After being hyped by the administration and its congressional allies as an opportunity to end the more than three-year conflict in region, Trump's dealmaking skills are being tested in an international negotiation that could backfire on the country and globe. "The goal is always peace," the White House said in an Aug. 15 post on X, amid the talks. Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Arkansas, said in an Aug. 16 post on X that Trump "stood firm in defense of U.S. interests," and that the summit marks a critical first step to a "durable and stable peace that protects Ukraine's territorial and economic sovereignty." But Democrats and other detractors warn that the summit has largely benefited Putin, who is facing war crime charges from the International Criminal Court and seeking legitimacy on the global stage after starting a war that has resulted in more than 1.4 million casualties, according to studies. "Our fear is that the Trump-Putin meeting wasn't diplomacy—it was just theater," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, said in a post on X ahead of the talks. Trump seeks reset in pursuit of peace as Europe worries Trump returned to Washington on Aug. 16 carrying plenty of compliments from Putin, who said the war wouldn't have started if Joe Biden hadn't been in charge back in 2022. But without a deal the administration appears to be skipping cease-fire discussions altogether and pivoting quickly to reset its public relationship with Zelenskyy, who will be returning to the Oval Office on Aug. 18 for a talk that remains inconclusive to most observers. Trump began to tip-toe away from Putin and toward Zelenskyy in late April after Russia bombarded Kyiv with missiles. The president, however, is also reportedly considering land swaps including Ukraine areas not currently occupied by the Russians, according to the New York Times, something U.S. allies have opposed in the past. Zelenskyy said in an Aug. 16 post on X that he spoke with Trump and European leaders, adding that the "killings must stop" but that the battling must pause first before a larger peace agreement can be made. "The positions are clear," he said. "A real peace must be achieved, one that will be lasting, not just another pause between Russian invasions." In a joint statement, European leaders echoed that sentiment and expressed support for a Putin-Zelenskyy summit. "I'm disgusted that Donald Trump met with Putin on American soil and did so with no representatives from Ukraine," Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Illinois, a retired Army helicopter pilot, said in an Aug. 16 post on X. "Trump and his inflated ego may not realize it, but it's clear that Putin is not engaging in good faith to end this war."

In Trump's redistricting push, Democrats find an aggressive identity and progressives are on board
In Trump's redistricting push, Democrats find an aggressive identity and progressives are on board

Boston Globe

time40 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

In Trump's redistricting push, Democrats find an aggressive identity and progressives are on board

Then multiple Democratic governors promised new districts in their own states to neutralize potential Republican gains in Washington. Their counter has been buoyed by national fundraising, media blitzes and public demonstrations, including rallies scheduled around the country Saturday. 'For everyone that's been asking, 'Where are the Democrats?' -- well, here they are,' said U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas, one of several Democrats who could be ousted under her state's new maps. 'For everyone who's been asking, 'Where is the fight?' – well, here it is.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up There is no guarantee Democrats can prevent the Republican-powered redistricting, just as Democrats on Capitol Hill have not been able to stop Trump's moves. But it's a notable turn for a party that, by its own leaders' admissions, has honored conventional rules and bypassed bare-knuckled tactics. Advertisement So far, progressive and establishment Democrats are aligned, uniting what has often been a fragmented opposition since Republicans led by Trump took control of the federal government with their election sweep in November. Leaders on the left say the approach gives them a more effective way to confront him. They can challenge his redistricting ploy with tangible moves as they also push back against the Republicans' tax and spending law and press the case that he is shredding American democracy. Advertisement 'We've been imploring Democrats where they have power on the state and local level to flex that power,' said Maurice Mitchell, who leads the Working Families Party at the left flank of mainstream U.S. politics. 'There's been this overwrought talk about fighters and largely performative actions to suggest that they're in the fight.' This time, he said, Democrats are 'taking real risks in protecting all of our rights' against 'an authoritarian president who only understands the fight.' Texas made sense for Republicans as the place to start a redistricting scuffle. They dominate the Statehouse, and Gov. Greg Abbott is a Trump loyalist. But when the president's allies announced a new political map intended to send five more Republicans to the U.S. House, state Democratic representatives fled Texas, denying the GOP the numbers to conduct business in the Legislature and approve the reworked districts. Those legislators surfaced in Illinois, New York, California and elsewhere, joined by governors, senators, state party chairs, other states' legislators and activists. All promised action. The response was Trumpian. Govs. Gavin Newsom of California, JB Pritzker of Illinois and Kathy Hochul of New York welcomed Texas Democrats and pledged retaliatory redistricting. Pritzker mocked Abbott as a lackey who says 'yes, sir' to Trump orders. Hochul dismissed Texas Republicans as 'lawbreaking cowboys.' Newsom's press office directed all-caps social media posts at Trump, mimicking his signature sign off: 'THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.' U.S. Rep. Al Green, another Texas Democrat who could lose his seat, called Trump 'egomaniacal.' Yet many Democrats also claimed moral high ground, comparing their cause to the Civil Rights Movement. Advertisement State Rep. Ramon Romero Jr., invoked another Texas Democrat, President Lyndon Johnson, who was 'willing to stand up and fight' for civil rights laws in the 1960s. Then, with Texas bravado, Romero reached further into history: 'We're asking for help, maybe just as they did back in the days of the Alamo.' A recent Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that about 15% of Democrats' own voters described the party using words like 'weak' or 'apathetic.' An additional 10% called it 'ineffective' or 'disorganized.' Beto O'Rourke, a former Texas congressman who is raising money to support Texas Democrats, has encouraged Democratic-run statehouses to redraw districts now rather than wait for GOP states to act. On Friday, California Democrats released a plan that would give the party an additional five U.S. House seats. It would require voter approval in a November election. 'Maximize Democratic Party advantage,' O'Rourke said at a recent rally. 'You may say to yourself, 'Well, those aren't the rules.' There are no refs in this game. F--- the rules. ... Whatever it takes.' Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin acknowledged the shift. 'This is not the Democratic Party of your grandfather, which would bring a pencil to a knife fight,' he said. Andrew O'Neill, an executive at the progressive group Indivisible, contrasted that response with the record-long speeches by U.S. Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J. and the Democratic leader of the U.S. House, New York Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, in eviscerating Trump and his package of tax breaks and spending cuts. The left 'had its hair on fire' cheering those moments, O'Neill recalled, but were 'left even more frustrated in the aftermath.' Advertisement Trump still secured tax cuts for the wealthy, accelerated deportations and cut safety net programs, just as some of his controversial nominees were confirmed over vocal Democratic opposition. 'Now,' O'Neill said, 'there is some marriage of the rhetoric we've been seeing since Trump's inauguration with some actual action.' O'Neill looked back wistfully to the decision by Senate Democrats not to eliminate the filibuster 'when our side had the trifecta,' so a simple majority could pass major legislation. Democratic President Joe Biden's attorney general, Merrick Garland, he said, was too timid in prosecuting Trump and top associates over the Capitol riot. In 2016, Democratic President Barack Obama opted against hardball as the Senate's Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, refused to consider Obama's nomination of Garland to the Supreme Court. 'These unspoken rules of propriety, especially on the Democratic side, have created the conditions' that enabled Trump, Mitchell said. Even on redistricting, Democrats would have to ignore their previous good-government efforts and bypass independent commissions that draw boundaries in several states, including California. Party leaders and activists rationalize that the broader fights tie together piecemeal skirmishes that may not, by themselves, sway voters. Arguing that Trump diminishes democracy stirs people who already support Democrats, O'Neill said. By contrast, he said, the GOP 'power grab,' can be connected to unpopular policies that affect voters' lives. Green noted that Trump's big package bill cleared the Senate 'by one vote' and the House by a few, demonstrating why redistricting matters. U.S. Rep. Greg Casar of Texas said Democrats must make unseemly, short-term power plays so they can later pass legislation that 'bans gerrymandering nationwide ... bans super PACs (political action committees) and gets rid of that kind of big money and special interest that helped get us to this place.' U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, added that a Democratic majority would wield subpoena power over Trump's administration. Advertisement In the meantime, said U.S. Rep. Julie Johnson, D-Texas, voters are grasping a stark reality. 'They say, 'Well, I don't know. Politics doesn't affect me,'' she said of constituents she meets. 'I say, 'Honey, it does' If you don't do politics, politics will do you.''

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store