Nebraska college savings accounts expand to cover private K-12 tuition
LINCOLN — A proposal to expand tax-advantaged Nebraska college savings accounts to cover the costs of private K-12 tuition passed Friday as part of a larger bill related to property taxes.
The passage of Legislative Bill 647 was delayed because State Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha wanted to remove State Sen. Tony Sorrentino's proposal due to what she called a broken 'agreement' regarding State Sen. Ashlei Spivey of Omaha, which would have helped schools fund long-term substitutes so teachers could take paid time off around significant life events.
State Sen. Brad von Gillern of the Elkhorn area said there was no 'agreement' with the Legislature's Revenue Committee.
'There was no deal,' he said. 'I was invited into a conversation to talk about the bills that were at play, including Senator [Ashlei Spivey]'s bill. I told the participants in that meeting clearly that I will not make a deal. Each bill needs to stand on its own.'
The 'deal' involved a bipartisan group on the Education Committee and the state's largest teachers' union — which led to a month-long effort to get a package of proposals out of committee. That package is dead, replaced by a watered-down clean-up bill.
LB 647 advanced 35-13. That tally included the support of two Democrats, State Sen. Eliot Bostar of Lincoln and Dan Quick of Grand Island. Bostar said that he voted against including Sorrentino's proposal during the last round of debate but decided to vote for LB 647 as a whole because it was needed to balance the budget. State Sen. Dan Quick of Grand Island said his constituents have asked to be in favor of Sorrenino's proposal.
At least 42 states already allow such savings accounts to cover tuition at K-12 private schools, which was first allowed federally in 2018 after congressional passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, for up to $10,000 per beneficiary per year. A 529 savings plan — in Nebraska, NEST 529 — offers tax breaks to encourage families or students to donate and allows the savings to grow tax-free and be used for an approved educational purpose.
Nebraska voters in November repealed the state's new school voucher or scholarship program that was set to steer public dollars to private schools, though conservative lawmakers and Gov. Jim Pillen have pledged to keep trying to pass a replacement. Public school advocates have argued against using public funds for that purpose and said voucher programs in other states have bled public money needed for public education.
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
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Newsom calls Nov. 4 special election to counter GOP redistricting push
California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Thursday that his state would hold a special election on Nov. 4 to ask voters to approve a mid-decade redistricting plan. 'We can't stand back and watch this democracy disappear district by district," said Gov. Gavin Newsom in a press conference on Aug. 14 to announce the vote on California's Election Rigging Response Act. The proposed redrawn district maps could be released as early as Friday, Aug. 15, according to media reports. For weeks, Newsom and California Democratic lawmakers have been floating plans for this mid-decade redistricting. It's in response to Trump and White House officials who've urged Texas Republican leaders to redraw voting maps to gain five new Republican-friendly seats to the U.S. House of Representatives, USA TODAY reported. In California, congressional district maps are drawn by the independent California Citizens Redistricting Commission — not legislators — which was created when voters passed the Voters First Act in 2008. California has 52 congressional districts, nine of which are currently represented by Republican congressmen. 'We tried to play by a higher set of standards and rules with our independent redistricting, and we believe in that and we are not talking about eliminating that commission,' Newsom said in an earlier press conference on Aug. 8. 'We are talking about emergency measures to respond to what's happening in Texas and we will nullify what happens in Texas. We will pick up five seats with the consent of the people.' Polling shows that most Californians do not favor Newsom's proposed legislative redistricting, as they support the 2008 and 2010 initiatives that separated legislative officials from the drawing of congressional districts. Thus, Newsom is rallying Californians to support this initiative and trust officials to draw the state's lines. Here's what to know about the proposed plan to redistrict California. Newsom officially launches California's Election Rigging Response Act 'Today is liberation day in the state of California,' Newsom said at the beginning of his press conference speech. The Election Rigging Response Act would require a two-thirds vote in both chambers of the Legislature to appear on the ballot. If approved for the ballot, it would need a simple majority of voters to pass and would impact congressional elections in 2026, 2028, and 2030. Newsom made it clear that this proposal is a temporary pathway to combat the redistricting efforts of other states. Newsom emphasized that legislative control over redistricting in California is temporary and intended solely to counter Republican efforts to gain additional Congressional seats. He added that California would withdraw from this approach if Texas were to end its redistricting maneuvers. The move isn't just for California's benefit—it's meant to set an example for other states, Newsom said. He hopes blue states will respond to red-state redistricting in kind. While the plan shifts redistricting power to the government, Newsom emphasized it ultimately empowers voters. California's process will be transparent and public, unlike Texas's more private approach. Voters will see the proposed maps before casting ballots and have the final say on their adoption. 'We are about to get power back to the people. You have, on Nov. 4 in California, the power to stand up to Trump. You have the power to declare that you support a system that is not rigged." Who among California's elected officials support the Election Rigging Response Act? California Senators Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff both spoke at the conference in support of Newsom and the act. Padilla and Schiff agreed that California must fight against Donald Trump to defend democracy. Schiff said, 'You come after our votes in California, and we will fight you tooth and nail. Donald Trump, you do not poke the bear. Not while we are around.' Assembly member Isaac Bryan, member-elect of the California State Senate Sabrina Cervantes, and chairman of the House Democratic Caucus Pete Aguilar also gave speeches before Newsom's appearance. Cervantes said that if other states had established independent election committees like California's, this strategic redistricting would not be happening in red states. She also stated that the upcoming midterms could be the "last chance to check Trump's abuse of power." Who is not in support of the Election Rigging Response Act? In response to Newsom's announcement, Assemblywoman Alexandra Macedo, Vice Chair of the Assembly Committee on Elections, issued a statement calling the act a "power-grab" to make national headlines. 'Californians demand and deserve transparency from their government. Governor Newsom's sinister redistricting scheme is the opposite. There is no public input," read the statement. Additionally, Macedo said in the statement that Newsom is attempting to dismiss and take power away from the California Citizens Redistricting Commission. Who else spoke at Newsom's press conference? In addition to members of the California legislature, a series of speakers representing a diverse number of interest groups spoke at the press conference. Each speaker explained how different Americans could be affected if Republicans successfully take control of the House through redistricting measures. Jodie Hicks, president of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, spoke about the overturn of Roe v. Wade. She said that a federal abortion ban could happen if Republican states successfully redistrict to rig elections. To protect reproductive freedom, she said, fighting back with legislative redistricting is the answer. Hicks said, 'You take away our freedoms? We'll take away your seats.' Erika Jones, elementary school teacher and Secretary Treasurer of the California Teachers Association, spoke to how students are under the threat of ICE and Trump is defunding education. She said that, with more Republicans in the House, these conditions would worsen for her students. Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, said that Trump is not pro-worker, and David Huerta, president of the Service Employees International Union, California, had a similar sentiment. He said that Republicans' goal is to silence working people and serve corporations. Huerta said, 'California voters must be allowed to save our democracy. And I trust that California voters will save our democracy.' When will the special election for the Election Rigging Response Act take place? Newsom called for a special election on Nov. 4, 2025, for voters to decide on the congressional maps before the 2026 midterms. These maps would remain through the 2030 elections. It would take a simple majority of voters to pass the redistricting act. What do California polls say about redistricting proposal? A recent POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab poll shows that nearly two-thirds of Californians prefer to retain the independent commission, with only 36% supporting legislative control over redistricting. Newsom acknowledged the uphill battle but argued that 'inaction is not an option' if partisan gerrymandering continues unchecked in other states. What do current California congressional district maps look like? Sarah Sadhwani, commissioner from the California Redistricting Commission, spoke about how she drew the district lines that are currently in place. She claimed the maps are fair, nonpartisan, and competitive, but she said they must be redrawn to "level the playing field" in the next election cycle. Sadhwani said she is in support of Newsom's legislation 'with the expectation that this is a one-time occurrence. That this does not subvert the will of California.' See the current congressional district maps in California: Which California Congressional districts are represented by Republicans? California has 52 congressional districts, nine of which are currently represented by Republican congressmen: Doug LaMalfa, 1st Congressional District of California Kevin Kiley, 3rd Congressional District of California Tom McClintock, 5th Congressional District of California Vince Fong, 20th Congressional District of California David Valadao, 22nd Congressional District of California Jay Obernolte, 23rd Congressional District of California Young Kim, 40th Congressional District of California Ken Calvert, 41st Congressional District of California Darrell Issa, 48th Congressional District of California These lawmakers said in a joint statement in late July that they'd 'fight any attempt to disenfranchise California voters by whatever means necessary to ensure the will of the people continues to be reflected in redistricting and in our elections.' 'The Commission received feedback from tens of thousands of Californians as to their communities of interest, which shaped the current set of congressional districts,' they said. 'Districts that represent the local communities that they live in, rather than the whims of one political party. A partisan political gerrymander is NOT what the voters of California want, as they clearly stated when they passed the VOTERS FIRST Act and participated in the Citizens Redistricting Commission process.' This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: Newsom Announces Nov. 4 Vote on California Redistricting Plan
New York Post
14 minutes ago
- New York Post
The week in whoppers: Bernie Sanders defends Hamas, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson's nutty hit on Trump and more
Diary of disturbing disinformation and dangerous delusions This response: CNN's Dana Bash, Sunday: 'Would you say that Hamas has some culpability in people starving?' Sen. Bernie Sanders: 'No.' Advertisement We say: Huh? Hamas started the war that's led to Gaza's suffering. It steals food from civilians. It could end the war, and food shortages, tomorrow — by releasing hostages and surrendering. But, no, per Sanders, the terror group has zero culpability for starvation in Gaza. What's wrong with this guy? Advertisement This remark: 'I don't want to hear about this bulls–t about what y'all's constitutions [say about redistricting].' — Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Texas), Saturday We say: Oops. In urging 'blue states' to ignore their constitutions' rules on redistricting and 'redraw [GOPers'] asses out,' Veasey accidentally confirmed what Republicans have long charged: Democrats don't care about law and democracy; they just want power. And will do whatever it takes to get it, legal or not. Advertisement This claim: 'Trump . . . has always been intimidated by the intellectual prowess of black men.' — Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, Wednesday We say: Wow, Johnson sure pulled this out of nowhere — except maybe his own obsessions with race. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Advertisement Anyway, Trump took a bullet and never lost a beat, was hit with 91 criminal charges plus a civil fine of nearly a half billion bucks — and won the presidency decisively. He doesn't seem 'intimidated' by anyone. This statement: 'Frankly, I don't care if al-Sharif was in Hamas or not.' — Foreign Press Association president Ian Williams, Tuesday We say: Williams only cares that Anas al-Sharif was a journalist, as if that makes a crime out of the IDF attack that killed him. As for Israel saying he was a Hamas member, Williams blurs that 'Hamas is a political organization — as well as a terrorist organization, perhaps.' Perhaps? Hamas massacred 1,200 innocent Israelis in a single day; there's no doubt it's a terrorist group, and al-Sharif was fair game. — Compiled by The Post Editorial Board
New York Post
14 minutes ago
- New York Post
Democrats' twisted lies about Melania's past are cruel and creepy
Tough as the competition may be, the Democrats' most vile smear has got to be the ongoing insinuations that Melania Trump met her future husband thanks to notorious predator-procurer Jeffrey Epstein. The first lady has been aggressively squashing the crass smear for weeks, ever since chronically wrong scandal-hawker Michael Wolff claimed on a Daily Beast podcast that Donald and Melania met through a modeling agent with ties to Epstein, and suggestively asked: 'Where does she fit into the Epstein story? Where does she fit into . . . this whole culture of models of indeterminate age?' Wolff knows this market for sleaze-mongering: The usual Trump-haters were soon foaming at the mouth over the supposed Epstein match-making. Advertisement But truth still matters: The Daily Beast had to retract and apologize for a story reporting on Wolff's claim. Next, veteran Clinton councilor James Carville repeated the charge on his 'Politics War Room' podcast — but soon had to apologize and take it down. Then Hunter Biden pushed the lie in a profanity-ridden interview with Channel 5 — and answered demands he retract his remarks with a true-to-character 'F—k that.' Advertisement Then again, Hunter probably has no assets left to lose in any lawsuit. It's sexist filth, and downright creepy. The obvious suggestion is that Melania couldn't have succeeded on her own, nor formed a genuine bond with her husband: These men insist on crediting the infamous trafficker instead; dragging a woman's reputation through the mud is, we guess, just an added benefit. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Advertisement It means nothing to them that the first lady is plainly distressed by the smear campaign — as evidenced by her repeatedly sending her lawyers to kibosh these lies. Lefties shout 'Believe women!' until a woman on the wrong side of the aisle tells them she's not, in fact, a victim of some heinous scheme, a sick fiction these supposedly enlightened Democrats are perpetuating a bit too gleefully. This doesn't even come off as just more mud thrown at the president, with his wife as collateral damage: It's a head-on assault on her integrity, her honor. Frankly, it's hard not to conclude that these men are enjoying the pain they're causing this beautiful woman — which is sick even by the abysmal standards of modern American politics.
