Too busy fretting over you-know-who to follow the NV Legislature? The Current's got you covered.
The Nevada Current's small but mighty staff of five has so far covered dozens of bills introduced into the 2025 Legislative Session. If you've missed a story or two (or dozen) of them, we understand. (There. Is. A. Lot. Going. On.) Here's a look at the bills that caught our eye and where they are, complete with links to our prior coverage.
The next major legislative deadline is Tuesday, April 22. By that date, non-exempt bills need to be voted on by either the full Senate or the full Assembly.
* Notes: Bills exempt from legislative deadlines are marked with an asterisk. Lead sponsors are listed in parentheses. Bills with no lead sponsor listed are sponsored by interim committees.
(State Sen. Dina Neal, D) would establish a corporate landlord registry and cap purchasing power for corporate owners. Status: Passed Senate Judiciary.
Assembly Bill 121 (Assemblymember Venicia Considine, D) would require all non-optional fees, such as sewer and water, be listed in advertisements for rental properties. It would also require landlords to offer a free way for tenants to pay rent. Status: Passed Assembly Commerce and Labor.
Assembly Bill 201 (Assemblymember Erica Roth, D) would expand efforts to automatically seal eviction records. Status: Passed Assembly Judiciary.
(Assemblymember Venicia Considine, D) would allow a third party to take over the property until repairs are made and living conditions improved. Passed Assembly Commerce and Labor.
Assembly Bill 223 (Assemblymember Venicia Considine, D) would give tenants more power to hold landlords accountable for failing to provide livable conditions. Status: Passed Assembly Commerce and Labor.
Assembly Bill 280 (Assemblymember Sandra Jauregui, D) proposes rent stabilization for seniors. Status: Passed Assembly Commerce and Labor.
(Assemblymember Max Carter, D) would restructure the eviction process. Status: Passed Assembly Judiciary.
Assembly Bill 437 (Assemblymember Jill Dickman, R) would establish a Fair Access to Insurance Requirements (FAIR) plan. Status: Passed Assembly Commerce and Labor.
Assembly Bill 475* would provide funding for eviction diversion programs in Clark and Washoe counties. Status: Heard by Assembly Ways and Means, no action taken.
* (Gov. Joe Lombardo, R) would allocate $250 million to build more housing and expand the definition of affordable housing to include people with higher incomes. Status: Heard by Assembly Commerce and Labor, no action taken.
Senate Bill 218 (State Sen. James Ohrenschall, D) would adopt the Uniform Antitrust Pre-Merger Notification Act, requiring companies to submit to the state attorney general the same notices and information they are already required to provide federal agencies prior to mergers or acquisitions. Passed Senate Commerce and Labor.
(State Sen. Rochelle Nguyen, D) would curb how much profit pharmacy benefit managers can make. Status: Passed Senate Commerce and Labor.
mandates utilities report the number of disconnections due to non-payment. Status: Passed Senate Growth and Infrastructure.
Assembly Bill 44 (Attorney General Aaron Ford, D) seeks to crack down on 'knowingly deceptive' price fixing. Status: Passed Assembly Commerce and Labor.
Assembly Bill 204 (Assemblymember Max Carter, D) would prevent collection agencies from threatening to arrest people for debt, obtain a lien against a primary residence, seek to foreclose on home, or garnish wages. Status: Passed Assembly Commerce and Labor.
Senate Bill 54 would require the state's Department of Health and Human Services to apply for a federal waiver and amend the state Medicaid plan to cover medical respite care for people experiencing homelessness. Passed Senate Health and Human Services.
Senate Bill 244* (State Sen. Roberta Lange, D) would expand the types of obesity treatments covered by Nevada Medicaid, including approving weight-loss drugs like Ozempic for wider use. Status: Passed Senate Health and Human Services, referred to Senate Finance.
Senate Bill 353* (State Sen. Marilyn Dondero Loop, D) would increase Medicaid reimbursement for mental health providers. Passed Senate Commerce.
* (State Sen. Nicole Cannizzaro, D) would establish the right to assisted reproduction treatment, including in vitro fertilization. Status: Passed Senate Health and Human Services.
(Assemblymember Selena Torres-Fossett, D), known as the Right to Contraception Act, would strengthen protections against a state or local government burdening access to contraceptive measures. Status: Passed Assembly Health and Human Services.
Assembly Bill 235 (Assemblymember Erica Roth, D) protects employees and volunteers of reproductive health care facilities, as well as their spouses, domestic partners or minor children, by allowing them to request a court order that keeps their personal information confidential on otherwise public records within the offices of county recorder, county assessor, county clerk, city clerk, Secretary of State, or Department of Motor Vehicles. Status: Passed Assembly Government Affairs.
(Assemblymember Sandra Jauregui, D) would allow prescriptions for drugs used for medical abortions and miscarriage management to list the name of the prescribing health care practice, rather than the name of the specific individual providing the prescription. Status: Passed Assembly Health and Human Services.
Initiative Petition 1, the Clark County Education Association-backed ballot measure that would give Nevada teachers the right to strike, passed the deadline for consideration by the Nevada State Legislature. That deadline was in mid-March but came and went with no fanfare because CCEA leadership has made it clear they are using it as a bargaining chip for their other legislative priorities.
The 'A Teacher In Every Classroom' question is now slated to appear on next year's general election ballot unless the union voluntarily withdraws it.
Senate Bill 172 (Senator Edgar Flores, D) seeks to bolster protections for farm workers and amend overtime pay laws to include agriculture workers. Status: Passed Senate Commerce and Labor.
Assembly Bill 112 (Assemblymember Duy Nguyen, D) would allow workers covered by collective bargaining agreements to use their accrued leave to care for family members. Status: Passed Assembly Commerce and Labor.
* (Assemblymember Natha Anderson, D) — give graduate assistants the right to collectively bargain for better pay and conditions. Status: Passed Assembly Government Affairs, referred to Assembly Ways and Means.
Assembly Bill 388* (Assemblymember Selena La Rue Hatch, D) — requires private employers with more than 50 workers, as well as all public employers, to provide paid family and medical leave. Status: Passed Assembly Commerce and Labor, referred to Assembly Ways and Means.
Assembly Joint Resolution 1* (Assemblymember Natha Anderson, D) would let voters in 2028 decide whether the taxable value of property should reset when a home is sold. Status: Passed Assembly Revenue.
Assembly Joint Resolution 8 (Assemblymember Joe Dalia, D) would let voters in 2028 decide whether Nevada should establish a dedicated business court with the goal of enticing large companies to incorporate here. Status: Heard by Assembly Judiciary, then withdrawn and put on the Chief Clerk's desk. On Monday, taken off the Chief Clerk's desk and amended.
Assembly Bill 256 (Assemblymember Selena La Rue Hatch, D) would create a Regional Rail Transit Advisory Working Group to assess the need for a regional rail system in the state's largest metro areas, as well as potential funding sources for such a system. Passed Assembly Legislative Operations and Elections.
(Assemblymember Rich DeLong, D) would make the Net Proceeds of Minerals Bulletin public again. Status: Passed Assembly Revenue.
would allow the Clark County Commission to extend fuel revenue indexing (FRI) an additional decade beyond its current sunset date. Status: Passed Assembly Growth and Infrastructure.
(Storey County) would require companies seeking massive tax abatements to enter into agreements to defray the costs of the government-provided services they would require. Status: Passed Senate Revenue and Economic Development.
(Assemblymember Natha Anderson) would bar most HOAs from prohibiting licensed home-based childcare operations within their communities. Status: Passed Assembly Government Affairs.
Assembly Bill 238* (Assemblymember Sandra Jauregui, D) is known as the Nevada Studio Infrastructure Jobs and Workforce Training Act. It massively expands the state's film tax credit program to support a production studio in Summerlin in Las Vegas. Status: Heard by Assembly Revenue, referred to Assembly Ways and Means.
Senate Bill 220* (State Sen. Roberta Lange, D) is known as the Nevada Film Infrastructure, Workforce Development, Education and Economic Diversification Act. It massively expands the state's film tax credit program to support a production studio in southwest Las Vegas. Status: Heard by Senate Revenue and Economic Development, referred to Senate Finance.
Assembly Bill 376* (Assemblymember P.K. O'Neill, R) would create a 'regulatory sandbox' for the insurance industry. Passed Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee.
* (Assemblymember Venicia Considine, D) seeks to close a potential loophole that can be used by corporate landlords to avoid paying the state's commerce tax. Status: Passed Assembly Revenue.
Assembly Bill 487 would ban retail pet sales statewide. Status: Passed Assembly Natural Resources.
Senate Bill 318 (State Sen. Skip Daly, D) would ban charter schools from contracting with for-profit education management organizations. Status: Passed Senate Education.
* (Assemblymember Erica Mosca, D) would dedicate $100 million in state general obligation bonds for high-needs school construction projects in low-population counties that cannot fund them through typical means. Status: Passed Assembly Government Affairs, referred to Assembly Ways and Means.
(Assemblymember Daniele Monroe-Moreno, D) would change how Opportunity Scholarships are administered. Status: Passed Assembly Revenue.
Senate Bill 88* would discharge medical debt from those incarcerated once they leave prison. Status: Passed Senate Judiciary Committee, referred to Senate Finance.
(Assemblymember Brian Hibbetts, R) would make driving the wrong way a misdemeanor crime. Status: Passed Assembly Judiciary.
Assembly Bill 119 (Assemblymember Steve Yeager, D) seeks to crack down on paramilitary organizing and activities. Status: Passed Assembly Judiciary.
Assembly Bill 320* (Assemblymember Jovan Jackson, D) seeks to stop judges from using dress codes to turn away defendants. Passed Assembly Judiciary.
Senate Bill 457 (Gov. Joe Lombardo, R) is known as the Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act. Status: Referred to Senate Judiciary, no hearing scheduled.
Senate Bill 199* (State Sen. Dina Neal, D) — would establish guardrails around artificial intelligence. Status: Passed Senate Commerce and Labor.
would mandate that cities and counties with populations exceeding 100,000 people include 'heat mitigation' as part of their master plans. Status: Passed Government Affairs.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
4 minutes ago
- CNBC
Trump warned by top Senate Democrats to rethink advanced AI chip sales to China
Six Senate Democrats on Friday released an open letter asking President Donald Trump to reconsider his decision to allow tech giants Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices to sell AI semiconductor chips to China in exchange for 15% of revenue from the sales. The letter — signed by Senators Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.; Mark Warner, D-Va.; Jack Reed, D-R.I.; Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H.; Christopher Coons, D-Del.; and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. — was in response to an Aug. 11 announcement by Trump that Nvidia and AMD would pay the U.S. government a 15% cut of revenue from chip sales to China in exchange for export licenses. "Our national security and military readiness relies upon American innovators inventing and producing the best technology in the world, and in maintaining that qualitative advantage in sensitive domains. The United States has historically been successful in maintaining and building that advantage because of, in part, our ability to deny adversaries access to those technologies," the letter states. "The willingness displayed in this arrangement to 'negotiate' away America's competitive edge that is key to our national security in exchange for what is, in effect, a commission on a sale of AI-enabling technology to our main global competitor, is cause for serious alarm," the letter continues. Senators also warned that selling advanced AI chips — specifically Nvidia's H20 and AMD's MI308 chips — to China could help strengthen its military systems, a claim that Nvidia denies. In a statement to CNBC, a Nvidia spokesperson said: "The H20 would not enhance anyone's military capabilities, but would have helped America attract the support of developers worldwide and win the AI race. Banning the H20 cost American taxpayers billions of dollars, without any benefit." The letter from Senate Democrats also requests a detailed response from the administration by Friday, Aug. 22, regarding the current deal involving Nvidia and AMD, as well as any similar arrangements being made with other companies. "We again urge your administration to quickly reverse course and abandon this reckless plan to trade away U.S. technology leadership," the letter states. A request for comment from the White House and AMD was not immediately returned. Despite Trump allowing chip sales to resume, it has already become clear that China isn't welcoming Nvidia back with open arms, instead urging tech companies to avoid buying U.S. companies' chips, according to a Bloomberg report. "We're hearing that this is a hard mandate, and that [authorities are actually] stopping additional orders of H20s for some companies," Qingyuan Lin, a senior analyst covering China semiconductors at Bernstein, told CNBC. In a separate report, The Information said regulators in China have ordered major tech companies, including ByteDance, Alibaba, and Tencent, to suspend Nvidia chip purchases until a national security review is complete. —
The Hill
3 hours ago
- The Hill
Upset about DC's lack of voting rights? Look to the Democrats.
The deployment of the National Guard in Washington, D.C. has led to a media and political meltdown. In the New York Times, a column lamented that the military had not revolted against the civilian president. Even, so, commentators declared a ' coup ' because the federal government reasserted its constitutional power over the federal district. A Justice Department employee went so far as to scream profanities at federal officers on the street and assault one of them with a submarine sandwich. He was declared a 'freedom fighter' against 'the Gestapo.' The utter lunacy of the left was again triggered by Trump with an almost Pavlovian predictability. Trump rang the bell, and suddenly thousands of Democratic leaders began to salivate. In addition to denying a very real crime crisis in the district, Democrats immediately pivoted on the issue to renew unpopular demands for D.C. statehood. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, insisted that this was only happening because 'American citizens lack the protections of statehood.' Ankit Jain echoed that view. Jain occupies a farcical position as 'D.C. shadow senator,' an unpaid position in which he pretends to be a member of the U.S. Senate. Jain wrote that 'it's entirely possible that people will die as a result' of the deployment. He insisted that this would not occur in states where democracy governs: 'We may not have it in Washington, but if you live in any of the other 50 states, you do.' Over the years, I have testified five times in the House and Senate to argue for the restoration of full representation for residents in Washington, D.C. Residents could have a governor, two real U.S. senators, a voting representative in the House, a state legislature, and every other trapping of statehood. It needs only to go back whence it came. D.C. needs to return to Maryland through 'retrocession.' In academic writings, I have advocated for what I called ' modified retrocession ' where Maryland would take back the land given initially to create what was called 'the federal city.' The Framers did not want the capital under the control of any state, so they created the federal enclave to be under the control of Congress as a whole. Originally, the outlines of the federal city were laid out by none other than George Washington as the surveyor. It was a diamond shape, with territory ceded by both Virginia and Maryland. Within a few decades, Virginians in what is now Arlington County and Alexandria came to regret not having direct representatives and were allowed to retrocede back to their state. That left the triangle of territory from Maryland. However, Marylanders did not agree with their Virginian counterparts. They liked living in the federal enclave and decided to remain without direct representation. Congress previously allowed retrocession and could do so again. Under my prior proposal, the federal enclave would be reduced to the small sliver of land upon which our Capitol, Supreme Court, and the White House rest. It would finally give every Washington resident full representation. Also, in a city notoriously mismanaged for years, D.C. residents would be part of a state that excels in areas like education that could materially improve their positions. So if the lack of representation is so intolerable, why wouldn't Washington return to Maryland? It would give every Washington resident a voting representative in the U.S. House, two senators, a governor in a sovereign state, and a state legislature. The reason is politics at its most cynical and hypocritical. Democrats only want two senators representing D.C. if it boosts their numbers. It's not good enough to give them Maryland's senators. What's more, Maryland Democrats will not suffer a shift in the center of their state's political gravity from Baltimore to Washington. Finally, D.C. Democratic leaders are not eager to share power with Maryland Democrats, as they might gain all the trappings of a state. This is why, for decades, Democrats have settled to leave D.C. voters without direct representation in Congress. They decided it is better to lament the lack of representation on license plates than to give residents such representation through retrocession of the residential sections of D.C. to Maryland. Polling shows that most Americans still oppose statehood for this one city — a Vatican-like city-state. That is why Democrats are not keen on attempting a new constitutional amendment to change the status of the city. They would rather bewail the lack of direct representation while, ironically, trying to achieve effective statehood without a direct vote of citizens on a constitutional amendment. The fact is, Trump has every right to deploy the National Guard in Washington and to take over the D.C. police. Those are entirely lawful and constitutional orders. Yet the New York Times appears to have changed its position on the danger of insurrection. The Times recently ran a bizarre column by former Obama officials Steven Simon and Jonathan Stevenson, ' We Used to Think the Military Would Stand Up to Trump. We Were Wrong.' They complain that 'it now seems clear to us that the military will not rescue Americans from Mr. Trump's misuse of the nation's military capabilities.' The 'rescue' would have meant military personnel disobeying a direct order from the commander-in-chief because they disagreed with the need for the deployment. In fairness to the New York Times, that is not exactly an insurrection — it is more of a mutiny. What is striking about this debate is how entirely untethered it is from anything that touches upon reality. Statehood remains easily attainable for Washington, if Democrats would only stop opposing retrocession. Meanwhile, the deployment is clearly constitutional, regardless of how many columns or submarine sandwiches you throw about in another furious fit. The only thing that is clear is that Washington residents are again being played. They remain political props left stateless because returning them to full representation is not politically advantageous. They are given make-believe 'shadow senators' and protest license plates rather than restoring their prior status. As with the debate over crime, few want to discuss how to solve this problem. Given the opposition of the Democrats, Trump should take the lead and order federal officials to develop a blueprint for retrocession. He should use his office to fully inform the American people, and particularly D.C. residents, of the benefits of returning to Maryland.
Atlantic
3 hours ago
- Atlantic
Trump Has No Cards
President Donald Trump berated President Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office. He allowed the Pentagon twice to halt prearranged military shipments to Ukraine. He promised that when the current tranche of armaments runs out, there will be no more. He has cut or threatened to cut the U.S. funds that previously supported independent Russian-language media and opposition. His administration is slowly, quietly easing sanctions on Russia, ending 'basic sanctions and export control actions that had maintained and increased U.S. pressure,' according to a Senate-minority report. 'Every month he's spent in office without action has strengthened Putin's hand, weakened ours and undermined Ukraine's own efforts to bring an end to the war,' Senators Jeanne Shaheen and Elizabeth Warren wrote in a joint statement. Many of these changes have gone almost unremarked on in the United States. But they are widely known in Russia. The administration's attacks on Zelensky, Europeans, and Voice of America have been celebrated on Russian television. Of course Vladimir Putin knows about the slow lifting of sanctions. As a result, the Russian president has clearly made a calculation: Trump, to use the language he once hurled at Zelensky, has no cards. Trump does say that he wants to end the war in Ukraine, and sometimes he also says that he is angry that Putin doesn't. But if the U.S. is not willing to use any economic, military, or political tools to help Ukraine, if Trump will not put any diplomatic pressure on Putin or any new sanctions on Russian resources, then the U.S. president's fond wish to be seen as a peacemaker can be safely ignored. No wonder all of Trump's negotiating deadlines for Russia have passed, to no effect, and no wonder the invitation to Anchorage produced no result. There is not much else to say about yesterday's Trump-Putin meeting in Alaska, other than to observe the intertwining elements of tragedy and farce. It was embarrassing for Americans to welcome a notorious wanted war criminal on their territory. It was humiliating to watch an American president act like a happy puppy upon encountering the dictator of a much poorer, much less important state, treating him as a superior. It's excruciating to imagine how badly Trump's diplomatic envoy, Steve Witkoff, an amateur out of his depth, misunderstood his last meeting with Putin in Moscow if he thought that the Alaska summit was going to be successful. It's ominous that Trump now says he doesn't want to push for a cease-fire but instead for peace negotiations, because the latter formula gives Putin time to keep killing Ukrainians. It's strange that Russian reports of the meeting focused on business cooperation. 'Russian-American business and investment partnership has huge potential,' Putin said today. I appreciate that many Ukrainians, Europeans, and of course Americans are relieved that Trump didn't announce something worse. He didn't call for Ukrainian capitulation, or for Ukraine to cede territory. Unless there are secret protocols, perhaps some business deals, that we haven't yet learned about, Anchorage will probably not be remembered as one of history's crime scenes, a new Munich Conference, or a Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. But that's a very low bar to reach. The better way to understand Anchorage is not as the start of something new, but as the culmination of a longer process. As the U.S. dismantles its foreign-policy tools, as this administration fires the people who know how to use them, our ability to act with any agility will diminish. From the Treasury Department to the U.S. Agency for Global Media, from the State Department to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, agency after agency is being undermined, deliberately or accidentally, by political appointees who are unqualified, craven, or hostile to their own mission.
