Deadline arrives as Nevada lawmakers work furiously to pass bills out of committee
LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — A deadline today will be the death knell for some of the nearly 1,100 bills in the Nevada Legislature. Some of the bills never went to a vote. Others were dead on arrival, identified by Gov. Joe Lombardo as bills he would veto.
Democrats control the Assembly and Senate in Carson City, but Lombardo's veto pen could be the ultimate weapon for Republicans again this session. Lombardo vetoed a record 75 bills the last time the Legislature met.
Here are some of the bills that appear to be dead this year, unless lawmakers stage an end-run to revive them before the session ends on June 2:
HOTEL SAFETY ACT: Senate Bill 360 (SB360) would require daily room cleaning at hotels in Clark and Washoe counties, endorsed by the powerful Culinary Union. The bill, sponsored by Republican State Sen. Lori Rogich, never went to a vote in the Committee on Health and Human Services.
Las Vegas hotel rooms would be cleaned daily under proposed Nevada law
MEDICAL AID IN DYING: Assembly Bill 346 (AB346) would make it legal for a terminally ill patient to request medication to end their own life. The bill mirrored legislation from 2023 that was vetoed, but wasn't identical. Nevertheless, Gov. Lombardo signaled his intentions in an April 4 post on X: 'Expansions in palliative care services and continued improvements in advanced pain management make the end-of-life-provisions in AB346 unnecessary, and I would encourage the 2025 Legislature to disregard AB346 because I will not sign it.' The bill, sponsored by Democratic Assem. Joe Dalia, was passed in the Assembly Select Committee on End-of-Life Care on Thursday.
Medical aid in dying bill discussed at legislature, powerful testimony presented in Las Vegas
NEVADA LOTTERY: Assembly Joint Resolution 5 (AJR5) from 2023 is a proposed constitutional amendment to allow sales of lottery tickets. The proposal passed two years ago but has not been scheduled for a vote this session.
GUN BILLS: Two bills sponsored by Democratic Assem. Sandra Jauregui seem to be on the same track they followed in 2023, when they passed in the Legislature but went down to vetoes from Lombardo. AB105 and AB245 have wide support among Democrats, but Republicans aligned with gun rights oppose the bills. History tells us that Lombardo will veto them this session if they make it to his desk.
WATER APPLICATIONS: AB419 would require the state water engineer, who oversees water rights conflicts and manages water in the public interest, to have private meetings with people who apply for water rights. The bill is alive, but it's barely hanging on after the Assembly Natural Resources Committee passed it 'without recommendation,' with three members voting against it. The bill's status allows finance committees to continue working on it, but it's in a kind of limbo. Remarks during Thursday's bill hearing and again on Friday suggest that lawmakers think it would be better to work on the bill after the session has ended. Republican Assem. Rich DeLong is the bill's sponsor, and water conservation groups have lined up against it.
Bills that don't advance today could come back as amendments to other bills after the deadline. In some cases, entire bills are gutted and replaced by amendments.
After the April 11 deadline, legislation faces an April 22 deadline to advance. Bills originating in the Assembly have to pass a vote of the full Assembly to go to the Senate, and vice-versa.
We will also track bills that advance through the day.Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republicans reject ranked choice voting nationwide. Why?
The conservative backlash against ranked choice voting grew to over one-third of U.S. states last week as Iowa became the 17th Republican-controlled legislature in less than four years to ban the alternative voting system. Besides Iowa, states prohibiting ranked choice voting this year include Arkansas, Kansas, North Dakota, West Virginia and Wyoming. These states follow on the heels of Florida and Tennessee that turned against the once-popular voting system in 2022. Unlike Utah, none of these 17 states ever implemented ranked choice voting, which is marketed by its cheerleaders as a way to give voters more options, incentivize centrist election outcomes and turn down the temperature of political rhetoric. But the Beehive State, too, may be seeing enthusiasm wane for its experiment with ranked choice voting. Some municipalities that tested the unique process have reported unintuitive election results, voter confusion and decreased turnout. There is also a partisan element. Along with mail-in ballots and voter roll cleanup, ranked choice voting has been thrown into the middle of a nationwide debate over how to increase trust in election results. 'It's gotten caught in the political division that's in our country right now,' said Kelleen Potter, the executive director of Utah Ranked Choice Voting. Now, as the Utah Legislature's seven-year ranked choice voting pilot program comes to a close, Potter hopes lawmakers will allow local governments leaders who like the voting program to continue using it indefinitely. Over the past three municipal election cycles, two dozen Utah cities have used ranked choice voting. But after an initial burst of interest, the craze might be fizzling out. In 2019, two cities utilized ranked choice voting. In 2021, that number shot up to 23. In 2023, it fell to 12. And this year, only four cities plan to have ranked choice elections: Salt Lake City, South Salt Lake, Millcreek and Midvale. Ranked choice voting differs from America's traditional 'first-past-the-post' process, where each voter casts one ballot for one candidate. Instead, voters are asked to arrange candidates in order of preference. If no candidate receives a majority of votes in the first round, the lowest vote-getter is eliminated and ballots are redistributed based on subsequent rankings until a candidate receives a majority. Advocates argue the process encourages candidates to seek broad support, opens the door for third parties and removes the pressure to vote for the lesser of two evils. 'It's done exactly what it was supposed to do,' Potter said of the pilot program. 'Consistently in all the surveys that have been done, the majority of voters have liked using it.' A Utah Ranked Choice Voting poll in 2021 found that over 85% of voters who used ranked choice voting liked it. A Millcreek poll found that around 70% of voters also liked it. And a UVU analysis found support among around 60% of Utahns who had used ranked choice voting. But critics counter that in crowded contests, the process relies on an opaque algorithm that can be hard to understand, throws out incomplete ballots and fosters skepticism. Several years after Republicans brought ranked choice voting to Utah — former state GOP chair Stan Lockhart is a prominent proponent of the system — GOP lawmakers appear ready to ditch it. A 2025 bill that would have extended the voting program for another decade was killed before it ever came up for a vote. When bill sponsor Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, was asked whether he thought there was a desire among lawmakers to let cities continue using ranked choice voting, he said his last attempt showed the answer is 'a resounding 'NO.'' Even though some of this reaction is surely partisan — Trump has called ranked choice voting 'one of the greatest threats to democracy' — much of it is driven by legitimate concerns about introducing a novel election system during such a fraught political environment, according to Lisa Dixon, the executive director of the right-leaning Center for Election Confidence. 'People are seeing that, on the one hand, it introduces some new problems,' Dixon said. 'And then, on the flip side, we've also seen that it doesn't always deliver its promises of creating consensus candidates that are more in the middle.' Where it has been implemented statewide, it has sometimes produced 'unpredictable' outcomes, Dixon said, as in the case of Republican Sarah Palin's loss to Democrat Mary Peltola in Alaska's 2022 special at-large House race, where a large majority of voters preferred Republican representation. That same year, a ranked choice election for a school board seat in Oakland, California, declared the wrong candidate as the winner because of a programming glitch. But the wrong candidate was certified before a recount identified the error. And while the 2021 New York City mayoral race has been touted as an example of ranked choice voting electing a more moderate candidate — Mayor Eric Adams — this year, it appears that multiple progressive groups are attempting to game the system to elect a self-described socialist. 'Whatever the problem that we're trying to fix in our country, we shouldn't be abandoning what we currently do, and turning to a system that's going to introduce more problems,' Dixon said.
The Hill
14 minutes ago
- The Hill
Senate GOP unveil long-awaited SNAP proposals for Trump bill
Senate Republicans on Wednesday rolled out a suite of proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as a key component of President Trump's 'big beautiful bill' – but it dials back some of the proposals sought by the House that drew intraparty concerns. The new legislative text from the Senate would require states to cover some of the cost of SNAP benefits, which are currently completely funded by the federal government, if they have a payment error rate above 6 percent beginning in fiscal 2028, while allowing states with rates below that level to continue paying zero percent. It also proposes states with higher payment error rates cover a greater share of benefit costs. If the error rate is 6 percent or higher, states would be subject to a sliding scale that could see its share of allotments rise to a range of between 5 percent to 15 percent. The House, by contrast, called for all states to cover 5 percent of the cost of allotments in its agricultural proposal passed as part of a broader plan to advance Trump's tax agenda last month, with states that had higher payment error rates having to pay anywhere between 15 to 25 percent. The softened proposal comes as Senate Republicans expressed concerns about how the House pitch would have impacted states. 'This bill takes a commonsense approach to reforming SNAP-cutting waste, increasing state accountability, and helping recipients transition to self-sufficiency through work and training,' Senate Agriculture Chairman John Boozman (R-Ariz.) said in a statement on Wednesday. 'It's about being good stewards of taxpayer dollars while giving folks the tools to succeed.' 'At the same time, our farmers and ranchers are facing real challenges,' he said. 'This legislation delivers the risk management tools and updated farm bill safety net they need to keep producing the safest, most abundant and affordable food, fuel, and fiber in the world. It's an investment in rural America and the future of agriculture.' Like the House bill, the Senate bill would also decrease the administrative cost the federal government is required to pay to help cover program operations in the states by 25 percent, but beginning in fiscal year 2027. The proposals in both chambers also seek to limit the federal government's ability to increase monthly benefits in the future and beef up work requirements, as well as farm provisions that GOP leaders have argued will make it easier to craft a bipartisan farm bill in the months ahead – although Democrats have said otherwise. Republicans on the Senate Agriculture Committee estimated the recent legislation would generate $144 billion in net savings in the years ahead as the party looks to ramp up cost-cutting measures in Trump's plan amid concerns about the overall deficit impact of his tax priorities.
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Los Angeles DA delivers scathing warning to violent protesters causing havoc: 'We're coming for you'
Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman sent a strong warning Wednesday to those behind the recent riot violence: "We will track you down. We will arrest you. We will prosecute you. And we will punish you." Standing with LA Sheriff Robert Luna and LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell, Hochman announced felony charges against several rioters accused of attacking officers, looting stores and vandalizing public property. More arrests and charges are expected in the coming days. "Let me provide some bad news for you," Hochman said. "There's a tremendous amount of video out there through social media, and otherwise we will know who you are, who engaged in this conduct. … So, for people who've already engaged in this, in this illegal activity, we're coming for you." Ice Ramps Up Arrests Of Convicted Criminals As Riots Rage In Blue City: 'You Will Not Stop Us' Five criminal cases were detailed during the press conference. Juan Rodriguez of Gardena is accused of handing out and throwing commercial-grade fireworks at LAPD officers, injuring one. He faces over six years in prison. Randy Paul Ruiz and Georgina Rava-Yero allegedly drove motorcycles into a police line, injuring officers. Both face felony charges and over six years in prison. In a separate case, Timmy Paulk and Rayven Mitchell were charged with allegedly looting a Nike store downtown. They face up to three years in prison. Read On The Fox News App Senator Launches Investigation Into Democratic Org Over Potential Support For La Rioters Ulysses Sanchez, a three-strike felon, was charged with assault and gun possession after allegedly recklessly driving through downtown and injuring bystanders. He could face 25 years to life. Christopher Gonzalez and Yoselin Johnson were charged with felony vandalism after allegedly painting graffiti on the Hall of Justice. Deputies say they found paint buckets and a large roller pole in their car. "These are not protesters," said Sheriff Luna. "There's a big distinction between individuals that protest and demonstrate to violent, destructive, basically anarchist. ... What we're talking about are the individuals who don't care about the issue at hand." Luna praised the district attorney for taking fast action, assigning a special prosecutor to focus on crimes against law enforcement. He also noted help from federal agencies, with some suspects possibly facing federal charges. Chief McDonnell revealed some of the dangers officers have faced in recent days. He said officers have been targeted with fireworks, Molotov cocktails and even mortars. "This is no longer a protest when commercial-grade fireworks are being used as weapons, and our officers are under direct attack," he said. "That's not free speech. That's a felony. "We will facilitate all peaceful First Amendment activity," said Sheriff Luna. "But when you have people that are out here to commit acts of violence, against our deputy sheriffs or police officers or, just, they're destroying our city. We're going to stop it."Original article source: Los Angeles DA delivers scathing warning to violent protesters causing havoc: 'We're coming for you'
