Not asking for a perfect world – just a livable one
Pure water. Clean air. Healthy soil. A livable environment.
These things should be guaranteed as integral to the well-being of our beautiful state, as a well-functioning government or the Earth spinning on its axis.
Yet for decades, the workings of fossil fuels and carbon emissions have made things like a clean environment precarious. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, climate change has exacerbated the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events to the point at which, in 2024 alone, extreme weather cost Nebraska $2 billion in damages. Climate change is costing Nebraska business.
It's costing us health. It's even costing us lives. And it's making countless Nebraskans wonder: What will happen when the droughts keep killing our crops? When the heat waves keep forcing us indoors? When the summer storms keep destroying our homes?
That's why we and others want the Nebraska Legislature to consider Legislative Resolution 22CA, also known as the Green Amendment. LR 22CA, introduced by State Sen. George Dungan of Lincoln, states that 'all people have a right to a clean and healthy environment' and that 'the state, and each subdivision thereof, shall serve as trustee of the natural resources of Nebraska.'
The Green Amendment would promote policies to stabilize our climate — stability that Nebraska desperately needs. While Nebraska does have some provisions related to the environment in its constitution, there is no outright affirmation of what we all know to be true: that every Nebraskan deserves access to a safe, healthy environment. The Green Amendment would change that.
Additionally, the Green Amendment would unlock actions to protect Nebraska's life-giving natural resources. Three states, New York, Pennsylvania and Montana, have versions of a Green Amendment, and in Montana, a group of young people used this once-symbolic amendment to push for real climate action in their state.
In Held v. State of Montana, 16 young plaintiffs sued the Montana state government over its inaction on climate change, stating that not acting on such a crisis restricted access to a clean environment and was therefore unconstitutional. They won.
This example from Montana shows what a driving force a Green Amendment can be — legally, politically and socially. Just like in Montana, a Green Amendment in Nebraska would allow young Nebraskans to start uniting around climate action.
It would allow us to use the court system to hold corporations and the government accountable for climate action. It would empower Nebraskans of all ages to work with our communities and local governments toward a sustainable future.
In fact, we're already starting. The youth environmental group Omaha Students for Sustainability organized a rally on Feb. 26th, along with organizations like the Nebraska Sierra Club, to show our support for LR 22CA. Dozens of proponents testified at the hearing before the Natural Resources Committee that day, and their testimonies made it clear that the Green Amendment would not only promote climate action, but also would demonstrate how much the government cares about the futures of young Nebraskans.
Forward-thinking legislation is more crucial now than ever, especially with Nebraska's oft-discussed 'brain drain.' The University of Nebraska at Omaha reported that in 2022, roughly 31,600 people 25 years of age and older migrated out of Nebraska. Young people are consistently leaving our state for reasons ranging from a lack of economic opportunity to political discontent.
A Green Amendment would be a major step toward stopping this brain drain. Cementing the legal right to a clean environment would show young Nebraskans that their elected officials, no matter their party, prioritize the future of our state and the people living in it.
I don't think anyone disagrees that all Nebraskans deserve a clean and healthy environment. They may disagree on how to achieve that goal. Not everyone, understandably, thinks it should be up to the government to create a perfect world.
But we're not asking for a perfect world. We're asking for a livable one, and I think the government has a responsibility to provide at least that.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
16 hours ago
- Newsweek
'Cornhusker Clink' Becomes Latest Trump Immigration Detention Center
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen, a Republican, announced Tuesday that an immigration detention center will be established in the state's southwest farming region as President Donald Trump's administration accelerates its expansion of facilities to hold immigrants awaiting deportation. Pillen said he and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem had agreed to convert an existing inmate work camp into a site for people detained in immigration proceedings. "This is about keeping Nebraskans – and Americans across our country – safe," Pillen said in a statement. The move comes amid a nationwide buildout of detention infrastructure. In June, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities held more than 56,000 immigrants, the highest number since 2019. New and planned facilities include the Florida Everglades' remote "Alligator Alcatraz," which can hold up to 3,000 detainees in tent structures, as well as "Deportation Depot" in north Florida, a proposed facility in Mason, Tennessee, and the 1,000-bed "Speedway Slammer" in Indiana. Some of the new centers have already drawn lawsuits and community backlash over conditions, environmental compliance and transparency. In Nebraska, state Sen. Megan Hunt, an independent, blasted what she described as a lack of openness from the governor and said local immigrant communities are being unfairly targeted. "The No. 1 thing we need to do is protect our neighbors, protect the people in our communities who are being targeted by these horrible people, these horrible organizations that are making choices to lock up, detain, disappear our neighbors and families and friends," Hunt said in a video posted to social media. This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow. This article includes reporting by the Associated Press.
The Hill
a day ago
- The Hill
What's really behind state bans on lab-grown meat?
In 2023, West Coast companies Upside Foods and Good Meat were cleared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to begin selling their lab-grown meat nationwide. This approval was a groundbreaking moment in history for scientific advancement and the future of animal welfare. Lab-grown meat is produced by collecting cell tissue from a living animal and then bathing the cells in nutrients to grow them into muscle tissue. No animals are slaughtered in this process. Each year, a low-end estimate of 1.2 trillion land animals and fish are slaughtered for consumption. Lab-grown meat holds the potential to save a large number of animals per year with its slaughter-free process. However, lab-grown meat is not yet available in retail. As it stands, lab-grown meat has not achieved a viable production rate to be sold in stores nationwide. Further innovation is still necessary to increase production speeds and reduce manufacturing costs for the product to succeed. Despite this, state policymakers are taking swift action to pass legislation that bans its production and sale before it is made available on store shelves. To complicate matters for lab-grown meat producers, policymakers enforcing the bans are backed by powerful meat industry lobbyists, including Tyson Foods and JBS USA. The development and sale of lab-grown meat are now banned in 7 states: Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Montana, Indiana, Texas, and Nebraska. Several more states are also considering bans, and many states will likely continue to join the anti-lab-grown meat coalition before the end of the year. Policymakers pushing for bans have argued that, without proper labelling, the product is deceptive to consumers. Yet, several states have already passed legislation for transparent labelling of mock meats in stores. Additionally, the USDA proposed the FAIR Labels Act of 2024, which, if passed, would federally require mock meat companies to clearly label their products as 'imitation' or 'lab-grown.' And are the policymakers enforcing bans truly concerned for consumers? Nebraska's recent lab-grown meat ban, approved by Governor Jim Pillen (R), raises many questions. Pillen founded Pillen Family Farms, which is currently the largest pork producer in Nebraska. He also helped found Wholestone Farms, the second-largest pork producer in the country. During his 2022 election campaign, he also received $50,000 from Smithfield Foods, the nation's largest pork producer, in addition to donations from several other meat industry giants. Pillen has an extensive history in livestock production. And lab-grown meat bans cut their competitors out of the market. They sabotage the potential success of lab-grown meat before it has the opportunity to reach a commercial breakthrough. Dan Morgan, a Nebraskan cattle rancher, recognized this authoritarian theme when the state-wide ban was being proposed and spoke out against it before the governor signed it into law. Morgan wants the economic freedom to compete with lab-grown products. If cattle ranchers want to prove that traditional farming is superior, they should not have to hide behind federal protections to do so. The recent bans take away the people's freedoms to choose innovative, slaughter-free meat products. Another drawback is inflation. When government regulation is used to decrease competition in the food industry, it drives price inflation, leading to higher rates of food insecurity among low-income Americans. Lab-grown meat bans were never about protecting the people; rather, they represent an authoritarian overreach to control what is on people's plates and decrease consumer choice. This will become another example of protectionism harming the economy, the people it is meant to serve and the animals who suffer. Isaac DeBlasio is a Junior Fellow at the Wilberforce Institute.
Buzz Feed
06-08-2025
- Buzz Feed
Republican Booed At Nebraska Town Hall Over Healthcare
Republican lawmaker Mike Flood was recently booed and heckled at a town hall in Nebraska, and the video is GLORIOUS. Over two million people have watched this TikTok that began with Mike asking, "Do you think people who are 28 years old, who can work and refuse to work, should get free healthcare?" As the crowd screamed a resounding "YESSSS," Mike looked like he was thinking, "Oh no." The face of someone who did not receive the answer they expected: "I don't think that the majority of Nebraskans agree with you," he finally said. When he asked for the next slide of the presentation, people began chanting, "Tax the rich!" Visibly frustrated, Mike tried again: "If you choose not to work. You. Do. Not. Get. Free. Healthcare." But the crowd wasn't having it and screamed, "BOOOOOO!" Mike continued, "Money does not fall out of the sky. It does not grow on trees. It comes from all of you. I wish there was a world we could live in where everything came from the government, and it was free. But that will never, ever, ever happen." Notably, he did not offer the obvious solution of, IDK, making the ultra-wealthy pay their fair share??? Naturally, folks in the comments had a lot to say. This person pointed out, "even if you work healthcare isn't free!!!!" Many people said what we're all thinking: "Healthcare should be a basic human right." "i love that you can hear the whole crowd say 'YES' it restored my faith in American society." "'Should people in the richest society in history have access to life saving care' isn't the gotcha he thinks it is." "Forgive me Nebraska, I wasn't familiar with yalls game DAMN." "*the majority screams yes* 'the majority doesn't agree with you.'" And finally, "'it comes from all of you' SIR YOU FORGOT TO TAX THE BILLIONAIRES." What do you think about all this? LMK in the comments below!
