Nebraska governor touts ‘historically conservative budget,' wins
Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen, center, greets State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil on the final day of the 2025 legislative session. June 2, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)
LINCOLN — Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen, in his end of session speech to state lawmakers, called the state budget 'historically conservative.'
Pillen portrayed the session as 'positive,' highlighting the passage of some of his priorities this session, including limiting high school and college sports participation to sex at birth, banning lab-grown meat, prohibiting cell phones in schools and a merger of the state's agencies in charge of overseeing water quality and quantity. He also praised a budget with a two-year average general fund spending growth of 1% a year.
'I believe we are setting the Cornhusker State up for success, and when we commit to strong fiscal conservatism and reduce the tax burden for Nebraska families, the potential of this place for generations to come is beyond our understanding,' Pillen said.
Pillen said he and state lawmakers worked together to pass a 'budget package that said no when we needed to say no' and put the state's 'idle pillowcase money to work.'
Nebraska lawmakers balanced the budget mostly by using the state 'rainy day' cash reserve fund and a series of cash transfers and spending cuts to fill budget holes. Democratic lawmakers have compared the budget to 'The Emperor's New Clothes,' a fairy tale where the ruler is naked but his subjects pretend he has extravagant clothing. Pillen tried and then withdrew his intended $14.5 million in general fund line-item vetoes to the budget.
Property tax relief, a top Pillen priority, was dealt a blow when the Legislature's last shot at meeting his pledge to keep property taxes flat this year fell short last month, Nebraska's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' that would have shifted sales taxes toward property tax relief.
That bill became the third property tax package in the past year to propose and lack support for broadening the sales tax base to lower property taxes. Pillen's push for 'Winner-Take-All' failed, as grabbing too few votes to overcome a filibuster.
The governor, whose family owns a major hog operation based in Columbus, alluded to addressing property taxes in future sessions.
'We can decrease spending and actually fix our tax system — and we have to fix it because it is badly broken,' he said.
Pillen achieved some of his culture war-related goal issues, including the school sports law, a law against foreign agents, age verification for future social media accounts and the ban on lab-grown meat.
Pillen didn't directly address some of the session's controversies, among them several heated debates as the GOP-majority Legislature pushed back against a handful of ballot measures passed by Nebraska voters, including new laws requiring paid sick leave, raising the minimum wage, repealing school vouchers, and legalizing medical marijuana.
He said he would continue to work with lawmakers to serve the people of Nebraska — and this time made no mention of a possible special session.
'I'm really proud to have partnered with you all on many of these initiatives,' Pillen said, 'So good news in just seven or so months, we all get to do it over again.'
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
Associated Press
24 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Bipartisan deals on voting and election changes are rare. It just happened in one swing state
LAS VEGAS (AP) — Facing a legislature dominated by Democrats, Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo stood before Nevada lawmakers earlier this year with a message that some did not expect to go far: 'Set aside partisan politics.' It was a plea that might have seemed more aspirational than realistic, given the country's deep polarization. Yet it set the stage for one of the session's most unexpected outcomes — a bipartisan agreement to bring voter ID requirements to the perennial battleground state by next year's midterm elections. In a deal that came together in the waning days of the session, the Democratic-controlled Legislature approved a bill that combined a requirement for voter ID — a conservative priorityacross the country and something that has been on Lombardo's legislative wish list — with a Democratic-backed measure to add more drop boxes for mailed ballots in the state's most populous counties. Lombardo is expected to sign the bill. The compromise represents a form of bipartisan dealmaking that has been especially scarce in recent years as the country's political divisions have deepened, especially around any potential reform to voting and election laws. President Donald Trump's lies about his loss in the 2020 presidential election fueled a wave of restrictive voting laws in Republican-led states that Democrats countered with changes to make voting more accessible, while an executive order Trump signed earlier this year seeking to overhaul how elections are run was met with a wave of Democratic lawsuits. Election legislation has mostly hit a dead end in states where the parties share power, making Nevada's bill all the more remarkable. A requirement for voters to show photo identification at the polls has long been a nonstarter for Nevada Democrats, who have argued that it threatened to disenfranchise low-income voters and make it more difficult for people to vote, especially older voters, those with disabilities and those without driver's licenses. Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager, the Democrat who brokered the deal with Lombardo after the governor vetoed his original bill to expand drop box access, acknowledged it was a tough concession. But he said it was the best they could do with the time they had left. 'Now I understand and appreciate that this will be a particularly challenging bill for some to support, but I also believe we have a duty to move forward,' he said over the weekend when releasing details of the deal publicly for the first time. It's a stark contrast to the 2023 legislative session, the last time lawmakers met. Lombardo outlined voter ID as one of his main priorities, but Democrats in the statehouse refused to give the proposal a hearing. The governor vowed he would take the issue directly to voters. Last November, Nevada voters overwhelmingly approved the voter ID ballot initiative that Lombardo supported. Voters will have to pass it again in 2026 to amend the state constitution, and the requirement would then be in place for the 2028 presidential election. Yeager told his colleagues over the weekend that voters seemed poised to give their final approval to the measure. He argued that passing a voter ID law now would give the state a two-year head start on implementing the requirements, to get ready before the next presidential contest. Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, a Democrat, said he respects the will of the voters and will work with the governor and local election officials 'to continue strengthening our elections.' That includes, under the proposal, a new — and free — digital form of voter ID that his office will be in charge of rolling out. Polls have shown that most Americans support voter ID laws, and that has been consistent over the years and across party lines. A 2024 Gallup poll found 84% of Americans supported requiring all voters to provide photo ID at their voting place to cast a ballot, consistent with Gallup findings from 2022 and 2016. That includes about two-thirds of Democrats, according to the 2024 survey. 'This may not be my favorite policy to have to implement, but I think as a Legislature we have a responsibility to do this,' Yeager told his colleagues. State Sen. Carrie Ann Buck, a Republican, praised the effort, saying, 'I think this is very thoughtful and very courageous of you to bring this in a bipartisan way ... I think our common goals are that every legitimate voter gets to vote.' But not all Democrats were on board, with five voting against it when it passed the Senate. 'I recognize what you're attempting to do, to stave off something worse,' said Democratic Sen. Dina Neal. But she said she was 'wrestling with the philosophical issue with voter ID.' 'I'm not in the space where I am openly willing to disenfranchise a population who may not even understand this law as written.' If Lombardo signs the bill, Nevada will join 36 other states that either require or request voters show ID when voting in person, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Not all states require photo ID, though. Some accept documents such as a bank statement, and some allow voters without ID to vote after signing an affidavit. A few states allow poll workers to vouch for voters without an ID. Under Nevada's bill, voters will be required to show a form of photo ID when voting in person, which will include government-issued IDs and Nevada-issued university student IDs. 'Nevada has some of the most secure and accessible elections in the country,' Yeager said, 'and this bill is a set of compromises between the Legislature and the governor that I believe can ensure that tradition continues.' ___ Associated Press writers Christina A. Cassidy in Atlanta and Linley Sanders in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.
The Hill
27 minutes ago
- The Hill
House Republicans warn Senate not to touch SALT deal
Moderate House Republicans from high-tax blue states are warning senators that they will not give the 'big, beautiful bill' a final stamp of approval if they change their proposal for the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap. The shot across the Capitol came shortly after Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) told reporters the upper chamber would likely tweak the SALT provision in the mammoth measure, one of several alterations. The House bill raises the SALT deduction cap to $40,000 — quadruple the $10,000 deduction cap in current law. A group of moderates in the House from New York, New Jersey and California has said they would not support the package unless it included substantial SALT relief. Those members are now warning that any changes to the provision could prevent the bill from passing the House once it is sent back from the Senate. 'If the Senate unwinds the House's $40K SALT deal, it's like digging up buried radioactive waste—reckless and sure to contaminate the whole One Big Beautiful Bill,' Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) wrote on X. 'Best to leave it alone.' He elaborated on his comments later, telling reporters he would encourage the Senate to keep their deal in place. 'The reason I've chosen that analogy is because the House took four months to get to where we could finally compromise, negotiate and settle on bill language as it relates to SALT and other interlocking and related provisions. So the Senate to disrupt that is to undo a lot of that painful work, to rip off some scabs, and to essentially restart the very painful process that we went through for four months,' he said. 'I would advise them to keep the bill intact. I respect the senators' prerogatives to exercise their constituents' priorities, but we worked really hard to get to the compromise bill that we got to, and it'd be a shame to have to restart.' Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), another member of the group, was more concise: 'Let's be clear — no SALT, no deal.' 'If the Senate changes the negotiated number of $40,000 — it will derail final passage of the bill,' Lawler wrote on X. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who was a key player in brokering a SALT deal in the House, said he spoke with members of the Caucus on Wednesday, shortly after Thune signaled changes to their provision, and plans to make their case to the Senate. 'I just talked to my SALT Caucus on the floor and I'm gonna go communicate to the Senate, again, it's a very delicate thing, we have to maintain the equilibrium point that we reached in the House,' Johnson told reporters. 'And it took almost a year to get to that point so I don't think we can toss that off.' Asked if there is wiggle room around the $40,000 deduction cap, the Speaker was coy: 'I'm about to find out; we'll see.' The SALT deduction cap was always expected to be a battle in the Senate. While a number of vulnerable Republicans in the House care deeply about SALT, Senate Republicans don't even have members from New York, New Jersey or California. The issue came up for Senate Republicans at a conference-wide meeting on Wednesday, where some were itching to lower the cap but wary of gumming things up for Johnson. 'Our goal isn't to create a problem for the House, but we also know the Senate will put its mark on the bill,' said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.). One Senate Republican indicated that some senators favor forcing the House SALT backers into supporting a lower ceiling. But they believe the easiest path is for the upper chamber to swallow its pride and defer to Johnson. 'It may be easier to say than do,' the Senate GOP member said. 'It would just screw the whole bill.' This senator said even lowering the ceiling from $40,000 to $30,000 could be risky since it might lead some of the House Republicans to vote against the bill. But the senator also suggested the SALT Republicans in the House could be bluffing. 'Is that enough to get you, because otherwise you say, 'I'm going to vote against the bill and for a $4 trillion tax increase as a Republican,'' the member continued. 'That's original sin there.' While Thune is signaling that the chamber will likely change the SALT provision, Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) — a former House member and key liaison between the two chambers — is saying the opposite. 'It was a hard fight over there,' Mullin said, pointing to its roughly $300 billion cost. 'It's a big number, but it was something they had to do to try to get the bill passed. We don't want to do something that would cause it not to pass.' 'The body here is going to work its will,' he continued. 'I would be a little [skeptical] about doing too much with SALT.' House Republicans in the SALT Caucus are warning they aren't bluffing. 'I wouldn't bet against a couple of salty Republicans, including a couple of salty New Yorkers,' LaLota said. 'I wouldn't bet against us.' Pressed on if the Senate should take the SALT Caucus' comments as a signal that the House will not pass a bill with a lower deduction cap, LaLota responded: 'That would be reasonable for them to consider that.' Rep. Young Kim (R-Calif.), another member of the SALT Caucus, expressed confidence. 'The leadership is working and talking to the Senate on a regular basis and I'm very confident much of what we passed in the House will still be there,' Kim said. 'So I'm not gonna comment on how I'll be voting for it till I see the package that comes back to us.' 'We're already working to ensure that everything that we pass in the House is still kept in the Senate version,' she added. Asked if there was any wiggle room on their SALT deal, LaLota said: 'I'm eager to see what they actually come back with. I don't know why anybody would logically want to disrupt something that was the result of a lot of hard work, pain, heartache and ultimately compromise,' he added. When a reporter pointed out that his comments were not a firm no, he responded: 'I would love them to increase it. That would be a great idea if they came to us with $50,000, I would endorse it right away.'
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bernie Sanders Says, 'There Is A New Breed Of Uber Capitalists Who Really Believe They Are Superior Human Beings'
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is calling out America's wealthiest and most powerful, saying that a new kind of billionaire class sees itself as inherently superior. In a wide-ranging interview on the 'Flagrant' podcast, Sanders took aim at everything from campaign spending deregulation and corruption to healthcare, education and the future of the Democratic Party. 'There is a new breed of uber capitalists out there who really believe, and they write about this as well, that they are superior human beings,' Sanders told the podcast hosts Andrew Schulz and Akaash Singh. He said many of today's billionaires view themselves not only as financially successful but as more deserving of power. Don't Miss:Invest where it hurts — and help millions heal:. Sanders continued, explaining there was 'writing on the right, on the far right, which really diminishes democracy, and that really the smart and the wealthy and the powerful have the right to rule.' Sanders pointed out that this mindset reflects an old worldview dressed up in new clothes. 'Back in the 19th century... I am the king, God made my family king... Sorry you're starving to death but that's the way life goes,' he said. 'God told me my family rules.' Schulz noted a trend among the ultra-wealthy: they often pledge to give away their fortunes late in life. 'Upon their death, a lot of them have decided to give away their money,' he said. 'As they get closer to death, they're like, 'Our goal is to give away all our money,' which seems to tell me that they think that there is an issue with them having all that money.' Trending: Maximize saving for your retirement and cut down on taxes: . 'They're like, 'It's kind of wrong that we should just keep all this in our family,'' he finished. Sanders criticized what he sees as a system rigged to benefit a few at the top. He said the country has enough money to fix its biggest problems, but refuses to do so. 'We are the richest country in the history of the world,' he said. And yet '60% of people live paycheck to paycheck.' He blamed decades of corporate influence, broken campaign finance laws and political cowardice for the decline of the American middle class. According to him, the Democratic establishment wants to maintain the status quo, and President Donald Trump's solutions will make it emphasized that Americans are paying more for less across key services. 'We are spending twice as much per person on healthcare as most of the European countries,' he said, adding that tens of thousands die every year because they can't afford medical care. His examples include going to a doctor too late, avoiding the co-pay and the deductible. He also mentioned the U.S. treats child care and education as afterthoughts while claiming to love kids. 'We pay child care workers McDonald's wages,' Sanders said. While he confirmed he won't run for president again, Sanders said the work is far from over. He sees hope in a growing movement of younger politicians, many of whom refuse corporate political action committee money. He said there are dozens in the House now who are standing up for the working class, citing Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and others. Read Next: Can you guess how many retire with a $5,000,000 nest egg? .Up Next: Transform your trading with Benzinga Edge's one-of-a-kind market trade ideas and tools. Click now to access unique insights that can set you ahead in today's competitive market. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? APPLE (AAPL): Free Stock Analysis Report TESLA (TSLA): Free Stock Analysis Report This article Bernie Sanders Says, 'There Is A New Breed Of Uber Capitalists Who Really Believe They Are Superior Human Beings' originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
