logo
Debate delayed on proposal to more frequently change Nebraska lawmaker compensation

Debate delayed on proposal to more frequently change Nebraska lawmaker compensation

Yahoo17-03-2025

State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair, left, leans in to listen to State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln at a legislative retreat in Kearney on Friday, Dec. 13, 2024. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)
LINCOLN — A legislative proposal to let an independent, nonpartisan commission set the compensation of future Nebraska state senators is now 'on pause' and will fall to the bottom of legislative priorities in 2025.
State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair, the sponsor of Legislative Resolution 25CA, announced the decision Monday after multiple senators spoke against the proposal during its first two hours of debate on Friday. Hansen said much of the opposition focused on issues that didn't pertain to the proposal itself, and he wanted to move forward.
'In the good nature of not holding up the session for I don't know how many more hours, I think we have some other work that needs to get done,' Hansen said.
Hansen said he still hopes to address the proposal later this year, or early next year, which if passed would send the final decision to voters at the November 2026 general election.
Proposed legislative compensation commission advances from Nebraska committee
The intent of the commission is to remove lawmakers' annual $12,000 salary from the Nebraska Constitution. Because it is in the Constitution, pay increases, or decreases, can't happen without a statewide vote, unlike other state officials. The commission could also consider health care benefits, per diems or reimbursement rates.
Any compensation changes could occur no earlier than 2029, after lawmakers' current terms.
Lawmakers ultimately would need to appropriate funds to cover any pay increases, Speaker John Arch of La Vista and Hansen said during debate. State Sen. John Fredrickson of Omaha suggested tightening the commission's authority to make it a requirement.
Voters last approved a salary increase in 1988, bumping salaries up from $400 each month ($3,600 annually) to $1,000 each month ($12,000 annually).
'It's not dead by any means,' Hansen said of his LR 25CA. 'Just want to bring it up later and get the people's work done first.'
During Friday's debate, State Sens. Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha, Danielle Conrad of Lincoln and Megan Hunt of Omaha said lawmakers didn't deserve raises if they wouldn't support working families.
Cavanaugh said 'we are not doing our jobs,' and she graded the Legislature's work an 'F.'
'We are nickel and diming people of Nebraska on everything,' Cavanaugh said. 'I don't feel that, in good conscience, I can support something to raise our own salary, as measly as our salary is, so long as we can't also raise resources we give to people who are 50% of the poverty level, who make less than $12,000 a year.'
The progressive lawmakers pointed to proposals that they said could hurt workers or weaken protections for minimum wage, child care, affordable housing, transportation, food or education.
'They think that legislators deserve more than everyday working families, and I disagree,' Conrad said.
Conrad and Hunt said supporters speaking about reinforcing institutional strength and integrity were hypocritical, with Conrad saying they were only doing so 'when it has an opportunity to benefit yourself, personally, financially, individually.'
Hunt said strength comes from lawmakers with the personal integrity to stand up for the legislative branch and their constituents, 'not from a paycheck.'
'Pay raises are not going to make any lawmakers fight executive overreach,' Hunt said. 'That takes leadership and courage.'
State Sen. Myron Dorn of Adams, whose LR 7CA would increase legislative salaries up to $30,000, said he worked with Hansen on the commission idea. Dorn and Hansen will be term-limited in January 2027.
Dorn said lawmakers work an hourly wage of about $5.67 during the session and devote two to three days each week full time later in the year. He and others said it very much limits who even considers running for office.
In the lead-up to the debate, Dorn said emails echoed the comments from Cavanaugh, stating: 'You're not doing a good job, you're not worth the pay that you have now.'
Dorn said he turned that around in his replies based on a philosophy his dad taught him, that 'you get what you pay for.'
'When we're answering those emails, I'm telling those people that if you're complaining about the senators and low quality of people we have up here, just remember, you get what you pay for, and that happens quite often in life,' Dorn said.
State Sen. Christy Armendariz of Omaha said that when she was considering running for office for the 2022 election, she approached her predecessor, former State Sen. Brett Lindstrom, and told him she needed to keep her full-time job.
Lindstrom hesitated, she said, but told her he thought she could pull it off. And she did for her first two years, working 6:30 a.m. to 8 p.m. during the week and working weekends.
But this year, she said she realized that wasn't a sustainable path and that she wasn't giving '100%' to either her constituents or her full-time position. So, she quit.
'It just isn't my nature to do anything part way,' Armendariz said.
Armendariz said she would still run again, knowing it is a volunteer position, but 'we're really, really far away from getting super valuable people on the floor, unless they are self-funded in some other way.'
'I do think it is fair, since the people are the ones that are the recipients of what is done on this floor, the people should be the ones to make a decision whether they want to expand that pool of people that can be elected,' Armendariz said.
State Sens. Terrell McKinney and Ashlei Spivey, both of Omaha, as well as Cavanaugh and Hunt said the Legislature needs more diversity in its membership.
Similar to Armendariz, Spivey said she puts in 18 hours of work each day into her legislative duties and paid work outside the Capitol, while still needing to be a mother and wife. She said LR 25CA was a 'weird dichotomy' between what lawmakers say versus what they do.
'I would love to have more women in the body that are parents, more folks of color, working people that can really bring perspectives and advocate for Nebraskans in a way in which I think that doesn't always happen currently, or in our history,' Spivey said.
McKinney said something needs to change, which could help people 'who care' decide to run.
State Sen. Rob Dover of Norfolk said the proposal was a good idea but was 'probably the right bill at a wrong time.'
He pointed to the state's $457 million projected budget shortfall for the next two years, prior to any legislative action. Dover asked why the proposal was coming up while the state is considering cutting dollars for public health, the University of Nebraska, cancer research, dual credit reimbursement and affordable housing.
'It makes no sense to me whatsoever,' Dover said.
Dover, who will be term-limited in January 2029, warned his colleagues running for future office that if they voted for the proposal, it was a matter of when, not if, they'd have a mailer attacking them for doing so.
Conrad agreed and pointed to former State Sen. Tony Vargas of Omaha who was blasted for a similar 2018 proposal. Conrad said LR 25CA was 'nothing more than another political trap.'
'It's not a good faith effort to strengthen the institution,' she said. 'It's an effort to force Nebraska legislators to continually vote on their own pay raise and to use it against them at election time.'
Hansen said that if lawmakers do a 'crappy job,' which he said he feels has happened in some years, the commission could decide to cut compensation.
'They could actually lower our pay, that's what I love about this,' Hansen said. 'The onus is on us, as representatives of the people of Nebraska to do a good job, to listen, to do the people's work. And if we don't, we could be SOL.'
It will ultimately be up to Speaker Arch whether he reschedules the measure. The proposal has about six hours left on first-round debate and would face two more debates, if advanced. At least 30 lawmakers would need to approve the bill on final reading.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump Admin Surrenders to Judges and Returns Abrego Garcia
Trump Admin Surrenders to Judges and Returns Abrego Garcia

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Trump Admin Surrenders to Judges and Returns Abrego Garcia

The Maryland father mistakenly deported to El Salvador by the Trump administration is back in the United States. Attorney General Pam Bondi confirmed Kilmar Abrego Garcia had landed on Friday, and he will now face criminal charges for allegedly transporting illegal immigrants. 'He was a smuggler of humans, and women, and children,' she said. Abrego Garcia's return appears to be yet another about-face by Donald Trump after the White House insisted he would not be allowed back into the country. The stunning move is being seen as a way out for the administration after being hauled over the coals by judges for ignoring court orders. The indictment, filed in Nashville, Tennessee, accuses the 29-year-old of a conspiracy to move undocumented immigrants from Texas to other parts of the country. Abrego Garcia, who lived with his wife and children in Maryland, has been accused of being involved in smuggling thousands of foreign citizens from Mexico and Central America. Some were said to be children. The married father was deported to El Salvador's top security CECOT prison in March as part of the Trump administration's crackdown on undocumented immigrants. Democratic Party lawmakers have blasted the deportation after a Department of Justice official admitted Abrego Garcia was removed from the country by mistake. Donald Trump and White House advisers, including Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller and Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, insisted that the Maryland resident was a member of the violent MS-13 crime gang. His family and lawyers have denied that's the case. Miller claimed that if Abrego Garcia ever returned to America, he would be arrested and kicked out of the country a second time. The federal filing was reportedly entered under seal in Tennessee last month. In a statement to ABC News, Abrego Garcia's attorney, Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, said they are determined to get a fair trial. 'From the beginning, this case has made one thing painfully clear: The government had the power to bring him back at any time. Instead, they chose to play games with the court and with a man's life,' he said. 'We're not just fighting for Kilmar, we're fighting to ensure due process rights are protected for everyone. Because tomorrow, this could be any one of us, if we let power go unchecked, if we ignore our Constitution.' NBC News reported that a federal grand jury has indicted Abrego Garcia on two counts, conspiracy to unlawfully transport illegal aliens for financial gains and the unlawful transportation of illegal aliens for financial gains. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said if convicted, Abrego Garcia will be sentenced to a U.S. prison. He will serve that sentence and then be removed from the U.S. The administration acknowledged in court papers that a mistake had been made and that a 2019 court order shielding Abrego Garcia from deportation had been violated. He feared persecution from gangs if he returned to El Salvador. But the White House insisted the father's gang affiliations should bar him from the U.S. in spite of the error. Abrego Garcia has been in the country since illegally entering at the age of 13 and has been living in Maryland for 13 years. He has one child with his wife, Vasquez Sura, a U.S. citizen.

Jesse Watters Trots Out Dehumanizing Analogy for Kilmar Abrego Garcia's Return
Jesse Watters Trots Out Dehumanizing Analogy for Kilmar Abrego Garcia's Return

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Jesse Watters Trots Out Dehumanizing Analogy for Kilmar Abrego Garcia's Return

Fox News host Jesse Watters criticized the Trump administration for bringing Kilmar Abrego Garcia back to the United States, saying the wrongly deported man's return was like taking a rental car to the car wash. 'I don't think they should have brought him back,' Watters said on The Five, shortly after news broke that Abrego Garcia is facing two counts of human smuggling in Tennessee. 'This is a national security situation. The guy is a designated terrorist. He belongs somewhere else. What are we going to do? We're going to spend two years and $50 million trying this guy and imprisoning this guy, feeding him, giving him healthcare, and then flying him home?' Watters said incredulously. 'This is like renting a car and taking it to a car wash before you return it,' he added. 'What's the point? It's not your car, and it's going back anyway.' Attorney General Pam Bondi said Abrego Garcia would first serve time in a U.S. prison if convicted, then be removed from the country once again. Garcia had been held in El Salvador's Terrorism Confinement Center even after the Trump administration admitted his deportation was an 'administrative error.' When the Supreme Court ordered that it 'facilitate' his return, the White House insisted that it was powerless to do so. Friday's events proved the administration was lying, The Five co-host Jessica Tarlov said Friday. '[White House Press Secretary] Karoline Leavitt—as well as other members of the administration, from the president himself to Kristi Noem—lied to the American people when they said they couldn't bring him back,' Tarlov said. 'Well, I guess you could get him back.' Andrew Rossman, a lawyer for Abrego Garcia, made the same point. 'Today's action proves what we've known all along—that the administration had the ability to bring him back and just refused to do so,' he told The New York Times. 'It's now up to our judicial system to see that Mr. Abrego Garcia receives the due process that the Constitution guarantees to all persons.' Abrego Garcia was sent to Tennessee, where the indictment was filed in May and unsealed Friday. The Times reports that an imprisoned man's information about Abrego Garcia moved the case forward. Prosecutors couldn't agree how to proceed, however, and one ended up resigning.

Jim Beam column:New voting machines overdue
Jim Beam column:New voting machines overdue

American Press

timean hour ago

  • American Press

Jim Beam column:New voting machines overdue

Louisiana legislators have come up with a new system for buying new voting machines that some watchdogs are worried about.(Image courtesy of Louisiana has always had an election system that ranks among the most trustworthy in the country. However, the national conspiracy about the 2020 election being stolen from President Donald Trump resulted in the Legislature creating what is called 'an overly burdensome system for buying voting machines.' The Louisiana Illuminator in 2024 said the 2021 law created the Voting System Commission within the Louisiana Department of State. It is charged with analyzing any available voting systems and recommending a specific type to the secretary of state. Legislators also created a separate Voting System Proposal Evaluation Committee to independently review vendors that submitted bids before making a final recommendation. Joel Watson, a spokesperson for Secretary of State Nancy Landry, said the multiple layers of bureaucratic red tape would mean it would take five rather than three years to purchase new voting machines. And time is important because the Illuminator said the state's current machines are 35 years old and have become difficult and costly to repair. The Illuminator said an effort was made in 2024 to shorten the selection process but it failed 'under pressure from a small group of Donald Trump supporters who came to the state Capitol several times during the 2021 legislative session and bogged down committee hearings with far-fetched election conspiracy theories involving the 2020 presidential election…' Many of the baseless arguments were about Dominion Voting Systems, a voting machine vendor that many Trump supporters falsely accused of rigging the election. Dominion in 2023 won a nearly $800 million defamation lawsuit against Fox News, which spread some of the conspiracy theories. Now another effort appears to be under way to purchase those machines. The Advocate reported Thursday that House Bill 577 by Rep. Daryl Deshotel, R-Marksville, which has passed both the House and Senate, authorizes the elections department to purchase a new voting system using a bidding process called 'invitation to negotiate.' An 'invitation to negotiate' (ITN) is a type of solicitation used in procurement, where the buyer invites potential suppliers to submit proposals and then negotiates with the most promising ones to achieve the best possible outcome. It's a competitive process where factors beyond price, like experience, project plans, and design features, can be considered. The newspaper said the Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana says the new process could lead to less transparency. It is a substitute for the open bidding process, which has delayed purchase of new machines because of lawsuits filed by unsuccessful bidders. Watson said Gov. Jeff Landry hopes to have a new voting system finalized by the end of 2025 and begin a 'phased-in implementation' of the new system in 2026. Under the new system, the state invites vendors to submit competitive sealed responses as a starting point for negotiations. It is then empowered to select which vendors it wants to continue negotiations with. Louisiana currently uses voting machines from Dominion and it will be interesting to see whether Dominion is asked for a response. The state's current machines don't include a paper trail, making it impossible to double-check election results. Absentee and mail-in ballots are on paper and can be checked, but over 90% of Louisiana voters cast their ballots in person. Landry defends the new selection process, saying negotiation is a public bid process. 'It's just more flexible …. It allows you to exchange more information than (a request for proposals) does.' Melinda Deslatte, the research director for PAR, said, 'We just want to make sure that there will be something available for the public to see at the end of this process to understand why the secretary of state's office chose the vendor that it chose.' Deslatte added, 'We're not entirely certain yet if that information will be publicly available. But we're hopeful because the secretary of state's office has indicated that they expect this to be a transparent process.' The PAR concerns are legitimate because the Landry administration has been active in trying to close public records. Landry and other top officials in his administration most of the time also refuse to respond to news media questions. We hope things will be different and that this new voting machine purchasing process will be open widely to the general public. Jim Beam, the retired editor of the American Press, has covered people and politics for more than six decades. Contact him at 337-515-8871 or Reply Forward Add reaction

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store