Lawmakers back Pillen veto, kill bill to lift lifetime ban on food aid for some with drug pasts

Yahoo

20-05-2025

State Sen. Victor Rountree of Bellevue, on April 10, 2025, as lawmakers debate his priority bill before it was vetoed by the governor. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)
LINCOLN — Despite three consecutive bipartisan votes this year to lift a lifetime ban on public food aid for some Nebraskans with past drug felonies, the Legislature on Monday did an about face that put a nail in the bill's coffin.
The only change between the 32-17 vote on May 14 that favored Legislative Bill 319, noted State Sen. Wendy DeBoer of Omaha and others, was a veto by Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen.
'If you change your mind, if you don't have the backbone to stand by your vote — on food, to people who don't have it — I don't really know what you stand for,' DeBoer told colleagues.
Despite pleas by her and others, including the bill's sponsor, State Sen. Victor Rountree of Bellevue — who invoked several Bible passages about forgiveness — the Legislature voted 24-24 to uphold the governor's veto. The bill needed 30 votes to override Pillen's veto.
That means the status quo stands, with state law prohibiting anyone who has been convicted of selling or distributing a controlled substance from accessing SNAP benefits (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). People with three or more felonies for possessing or using illegal drugs also are ineligible, but state law allows Nebraskans with one or two drug possession or use convictions access to SNAP if they complete a licensed treatment program.
Rountree's priority bill would have lifted the ban entirely under certain circumstances, such as if the offender completed their criminal sentence or was serving a term of parole or on post-release supervision. Also under Rountree's bill, a person with three or more felony convictions for drug possession or use had to participate in an accredited substance abuse treatment program unless a health care provider determined it was not needed.
Pillen's one-page veto letter came just hours after LB 319 had gained 32 of the 25 votes needed at the time to move it to the governor's desk. Pillen contended that the bill would create 'loopholes' where 'habitual offenders' could evade treatment.
'Individuals that distribute or sell illicit drugs should not be entitled to taxpayer-funded benefits,' the governor wrote. 'Any illegal drug users should be required to complete treatment before they receive their third felony conviction.'
Among those who consistently opposed Rountree's bill and supported the veto were State Sen. Tony Sorrentino of the Elkhorn area. He fended off colleagues' criticisms that withholding food as a punishment is 'barbaric' and said he was 'very comfortable about being uncomfortable' in this situation.
'I'm never going to stop standing up for the victims of these crimes,' he said.
Meanwhile, nonprofits and people affected by the ban voiced disappointment.
Derrick Martinez, a Nebraskan who is SNAP banned, said of today's action: 'We continued on a path doing the same thing that may keep people reoffending out of survival. It's time to do something better, because the old way has not worked.'
The vote shift by seven Republican legislators who last week voted for the bill came despite being called out by supporters of the bill. The seven: State Sens. Christy Armendariz of Omaha, Stan Clouse of Kearney, Rob Dover of Norfolk, Glen Meyer of Pender, Mike Moser of Columbus; Rita Sanders of Bellevue and Brad von Gillern of Omaha.
State Sen. John Fredrickson of Omaha said he had never cast a vote based on 'fear' of reprisal or political consequences from another elected official.
He said that if LB 319 was a good policy last week, why isn't it today? He asked colleagues to honor the role the Legislature has as a separate branch of government.
'We were elected to lead, not to follow, and certainly not to flinch,' Fredrickson said.
State Sen. Margo Juarez of Omaha affirmed her support for the bill and addressed a comment directly to Pillen: 'Do you not consider this a pro-life issue? Do you really support life?'
Clouse, of his flip, said he was about '50-50' for the bill before and that the governor's decision pushed him to the other side.
Said Meyer, 'I'm not inclined to override the governor's veto.' He said he also was swayed after learning later about a federal option that could be available to those the bill sought to help.
Armendariz said she had reservations earlier, and voted against the bill during the initial two rounds of debate. She said she didn't feel strongly enough for the legislation to go against the governor's will.
Among Republican lawmakers who stood by their earlier vote to support LB 319 was State Sen. Mike Jacobson of North Platte, who said he had asked Rountree earlier to bolster the bill with a treatment-related requirement, and that Rountree followed through.
Jacobson, in voting to override the veto, said he doubted that many of his colleagues have ever dealt with a friend or loved one suffering from a serious addiction. Because he has, he said that he understands there is no cure — only a vigilant commitment and regimen to stay clean.
'I've been around addiction,' Jacobson said. 'I would encourage some of you to do the same to really understand why addiction exists.'
State Sen. Sen Megan Hunt of Omaha and others noted that lifting the ban would affect people who had long ago served their sentence related to drugs.
'In Nebraska, this is the only crime where somebody can do their time, pay their debt to society, do their treatment, pay their fines, do everything that the judge, the jury, and the law says that they're supposed to do — but they pay the price legally for the rest of their life,' Hunt said.
State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln was among those who talked about 'smart justice reform,' noting that SNAP benefits help keep recidivism rates low.
State Sen. Bob Andersen of Sarpy County, who opposed the bill from the start, said such support services should be left to private philanthropists and churches.
Rountree — who opened the discussion by calling it a 'historic moment' and opportunity to take care of Nebraskans — said he was disappointed for the people of the state and the 1,000 or so who would have benefited by the legislation that had law enforcement support.
Also a minister, Rountree, in an interview with the Nebraska Examiner, called support for the veto a 'sign of the times' — government moving away from taking care of 'the least of these.'
Versions of LB 319 have been proposed in years past. Hunt said she has presented one every year since becoming a state senator.
Said Rountree: 'These are challenging times for legislation like this. It doesn't mean we're going to give up.'
Nonprofits in Nebraska that work with inmates reentering society after incarceration said state lawmakers 'got it wrong today.'
'When the government continues to make felony convictions and restrictions with no reprieve for anyone who has honestly worked to rebuild their lives, it shows us how out of touch our elected officials are,' said Jasmine Harris, public policy director for one such nonprofit, RISE.
She said to ensure successful reentry, barriers to basic needs must be removed. 'Otherwise, people find themselves in predicaments that continue these cycles of incarceration and addiction.'
Eric Savaiano, food and nutrition access manager for Nebraska Appleseed, said that ending the SNAP ban is about ensuring a basic human need. 'We won't stop fighting for this until this ban is gone. It is too important.'
Mindy Rush Chipman, executive director of the ACLU of Nebraska, said no one benefits from the Monday vote.
'The SNAP ban will keep making life harder for struggling Nebraskans, adding food insecurity to the mix of collateral consequences that are already hurting them and their families long after their sentence ended,' she said.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX