Latest news with #BenHansen
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Late attempt to shield physicians who recommend medical cannabis in Nebraska fails
Dominic Gillen of Bellevue, center, explains his family's support for medical cannabis, including for his 23-year-old son, Will, at a public forum in Lincoln on May 5, 2025. From left, State Sens. Rick Holdcroft of Bellevue, Jane Raybould of Lincoln, Tom Brandt of Plymouth, John Cavanaugh of Omaha, George Dungan of Lincoln, Myron Dorn of Adams, Danielle Conrad of Lincoln, Jana Hughes of Seward, Margo Juarez of Omaha and Merv Riepe of Ralston. State Sens. Ben Hansen of Blair, Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha and Terrell McKinney of Omaha attended earlier forums. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — A late legislative attempt Wednesday to give additional protections to health care practitioners who recommend medical cannabis to Nebraska patients fell well short of moving forward a day after a broader medical cannabis regulatory bill stalled. State Sen. John Cavanaugh of Omaha sought to add those physician liability protections Wednesday to a broader Health and Human Services Committee bill: Legislative Bill 376. The measure seeks to slash various reporting requirements and make other changes primarily in the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services. Cavanaugh said his effort was a 'solution' that would be a 'small but meaningful step' for some of the families who showed up Tuesday for LB 677, the medical cannabis regulatory bill from State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair. LB 677 failed 23-22, falling 10 votes short of overcoming an all-day filibuster. 'Give these families some hope, some opportunity to get access to what the voters approved at over 70%,' Cavanaugh told his colleagues. 'Vote to give doctors some small protection if they follow their conscience and their training.' 'Absolute failure': Medical cannabis regulatory bill stalls in Nebraska Legislature Under the ballot measures approved in November, a patient can possess up to 5 ounces of medical cannabis for any condition with a health care practitioner's recommendation. However, DHHS has not issued guidance and many advocates have reported that in-state physicians have refused to issue any medical cannabis recommendations. Until medical dispensaries are licensed, which is required under the voter-approved law by Oct. 1, cannabis can't legally be purchased in Nebraska. Part of Cavanaugh's push also comes as Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers has acknowledged the possibility of investigating the licenses of physicians who recommend cannabis and continued to challenge the voter-approved laws. Under Cavanaugh's amendment, in language identical to the medical provider protections in LB 677, a health care practitioner could not be arrested, prosecuted or disciplined solely for providing a written recommendation or for stating in their professional opinion that a patient is likely to benefit from using cannabis to treat or alleviate a medical condition. The Nebraska Medical Association had voiced support for the protections. State Sen. Bob Andersen of north-central Sarpy County, who staunchly opposed LB 677, argued that Cavanaugh's amendment was not 'germane,' or related, to LB 376. Speaker John Arch of La Vista, a former HHS Committee chair who was presiding over the Legislature at the time, agreed. Cavanaugh moved to overrule the chair, which fell short 15-30, so the proposal didn't reach an overarching vote. The motion needed at least 24 votes because three senators had left the Capitol. Hansen, a former HHS Committee chair, said there was no 'boogeyman' in the amendment. But State Sen. Brian Hardin of Gering, current chair of the HHS Committee, called the attempt a 'cheap parlor trick' that could get LB 376 vetoed. Gov. Jim Pillen has said LB 677 wasn't needed. 'Fascinating process of playing chess where they're trying to deep-six the committee bill from HHS with an unwelcome amendment,' Hardin said. State Sens. Bob Hallstrom of Syracuse and Mike Moser of Columbus also disagreed that the amendment was in the 'natural and logical sequence' to the subject matter of LB 376,' as Cavanaugh argued under legislative rules. Cavanaugh also pointed to a section in the bill that discussed civil and criminal protections for certain physicians or hospital staff. If the amendment was worthy, Hallstrom and Moser said, senators needed more time. 'I think this is crazy,' Moser said of the amendment, lambasting that it came around 8 p.m. Last-minute amendments, particularly late at night in legislative sessions, are not unusual. State Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha said she thought the amendment was germane and that her opinion was just as valuable as that of Hallstrom or Moser. Hunt said the 'gag' is that germaneness is whatever the majority says it is. She pointed to the 2023 merger of bills to restrict abortion and health care for transgender youths, which State Sen. Wendy DeBoer of Omaha also mentioned. The Nebraska Supreme Court later affirmed the combined 2023 bill as having been germane. DeBoer said she understood Wednesday's hesitation and asked Cavanaugh why he chose a last-second approach and hadn't warned Hardin or others before filing his amendment. He responded that LB 677 stalled late Tuesday and that he came up with the idea Wednesday. DeBoer said that if lawmakers followed past practice on determining germaneness, the amendment was likely germane. But she acknowledged 'it's kind of crappy to do it last minute like this, no offense.' DeBoer was one of seven senators who voted for LB 677 but on Wednesday voted to uphold Arch's ruling against Cavanaugh's amendment. The others were progressive State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln and conservative State Sens. Stan Clouse of Kearney, Myron Dorn of Adams, Rick Holdcroft of Bellevue and Jana Hughes of Seward. The two senators voting to overrule Arch's ruling and who did not vote for LB 677 were State Sen. Carolyn Bosn of Lincoln, who was 'present, not voting' as she continued discussing concerns with Hansen, and State Sen. Ashlei Spivey of Omaha, who missed the final vote but had supported the bill. Bosn, a former prosecutor who chairs the Judiciary Committee, and whom Pillen first appointed to the Legislature in 2023 before she was elected in November, told the Nebraska Examiner that she was convinced by Cavanaugh's argument that LB 376 opened up many sections of law. Had Cavanaugh's amendment come up for a vote, Bosn confirmed she would have voted for it. Bosn said it made sense and is within legislative responsibility if physicians are reluctant to act. Bosn, Cavanaugh and Hansen said it was also a question the Legislature would have to grapple with soon because the regulatory commission can't shield physicians through regulations. In his final plea to senators, Cavanaugh uttered a popular phrase that the 'hottest places in hell are reserved for those, when in times of moral crisis, preserve their neutrality.' 'Don't relegate yourself to the hottest places in Hell,' Cavanaugh said. 'Do the right thing for these families.' Cavanaugh and Hansen said the medical cannabis fight continues in whatever way possible, either in the final seven days of the 2025 session, the regulatory process or in 2026. Hansen pointed to a phrase on the north side of the State Capitol that he said was crucial as regulations moved forward: 'The salvation of the state is watchfulness in the citizen.' Speaker John Arch of La Vista ruled that liability protections for physicians who recommend medical cannabis was not 'germane' to Legislative Bill 376. A vote to overrule Arch failed 15-30. It needed 24 votes. Vote to overrule the chair: Carolyn Bosn, Eliot Bostar*, Tom Brandt*, John Cavanaugh*, Machaela Cavanaugh*, George Dungan*, John Fredrickson*, Dunixi Guereca*, Ben Hansen*, Megan Hunt*, Margo Juarez*, Dan Quick*, Jane Raybould*, Ashlei Spivey, Dave Wordekemper* Vote to sustain the chair: Bob Andersen, John Arch, Beau Ballard, Rob Clements, Stan Clouse*, Danielle Conrad*, Wendy DeBoer*, Barry DeKay, Myron Dorn*, Rob Dover, Bob Hallstrom, Brian Hardin, Rick Holdcroft*, Jana Hughes*, Teresa Ibach, Mike Jacobson, Kathleen Kauth, Loren Lippincott, Dan Lonowski, Dan McKeon, Glen Meyer*, Mike Moser, Dave Murman, Merv Riepe, Rita Sanders, Tony Sorrentino, Tanya Storer, Jared Storm, Paul Strommen, Brad von Gillern Present, not voting: Victor Rountree* Excused, not voting: Christy Armendariz, Terrell McKinney*, Jason Prokop* *Voted for a regulatory framework for medical cannabis in Hansen's Legislative Bill 677 on Tuesday (23-22) SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
‘Absolute failure': Medical cannabis regulatory bill stalls in Nebraska Legislature
Crista Eggers of Nebraskans for Medical Marijuana, center, leads a news conference urging legislative support for bills to help implement a safe, fully regulated medical cannabis system. March 3, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — A legislative proposal seeking to help implement Nebraska's voter-approved medical cannabis laws failed Tuesday, facing a tougher floor fight than four years ago despite widespread support in November. The latest measure, Legislative Bill 677, failed to garner the 33 votes needed to shut off a filibuster, with the bipartisan effort to stop debate falling 23-22. The regulatory push secured the support of eight Republicans, 14 Democrats and one nonpartisan progressive in the officially nonpartisan 49-member body (State Sen. Ashlei Spivey of Omaha, the only other Democrat, was absent from the final vote but had supported the bill). Republican State Sens. John Arch of La Vista, Carolyn Bosn of Lincoln and Merv Riepe of Ralston declined to take a position and were 'present, not voting.' State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair, a Republican with a Libertarian bent who sponsored LB 677, sought to appeal to his conservative colleagues that 'on a limb,' everyone could agree that medical cannabis could at least help someone. 'If that's the case, you believe in medical cannabis, and that's OK,' Hansen said. 'I know sometimes that scares some of us.' Freshman State Sen. Glen Meyer of Pender was one Republican who heeded Hansen's call. 'I would hope, and hope's not a plan, but I do have faith in this body, I would expect intelligent people with good hearts, which I believe this body is, can find a way to provide relief with some medical marijuana,' Meyer said. The other six Republicans joining Hansen and Meyer were State Sens. Tom Brandt of Plymouth, Stan Clouse of Kearney, Myron Dorn of Adams, Rick Holdcroft of Bellevue, Jana Hughes of Seward and Dave Wordekemper of Fremont. But at the end of the day, Gov. Jim Pillen, Attorney General Mike Hilgers and Nebraska's junior U.S. Sen. Pete Ricketts, R-Neb., Pillen's predecessor, prevailed in their public calls against passing LB 677, peeling off enough Republican senators to stop the bill. Voters legalized medical cannabis with 71% approval in November, for up to 5 ounces of cannabis with a physician's recommendation. A separate regulatory law secured 67% approval. Leading the charge against LB 677 was freshman State Sen. Jared Storm of David City, who echoed the calls of Hilgers and Ricketts that legislation wasn't needed to help implement the state's new medical cannabis laws. Storm and multiple Republicans said the new Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission, which voters created and charged with 'exclusive' regulatory authority, should be left to act on its own first, without legislative changes. 'If we have any issues, we can always come back as a body and tweak those issues, not jump off the cliff,' Storm said of Hansen's LB 677 and an accompanying amendment. He added: 'I don't want anybody to think that I'm some cold-hearted monster here that does not have sympathy for children and adults that are suffering through pain. But we have to get this right.' The hesitation also came as Hilgers' office continues challenging whether the ballot measures were properly placed on the 2024 ballot and an expected future state-led challenge arguing the voter-approved laws violate federal law. The AG's Office was in court earlier Tuesday asking for a citizen-led lawsuit alleging the same legal challenge to be tossed so Hilgers' staff can sue. Hilgers also organized opposition to LB 677 from 53 sheriffs, including the Nebraska Sheriffs Association, and the Police Chiefs Association of Nebraska. State Sen. John Fredrickson of Omaha, a mental health practitioner, said cannabis would not 'leap off the shelves' and corrupt Nebraska youth, as some opponents contended. He said senators sometimes needed to go outside and 'touch some grass and just think about what the world is like outside of this room.' 'Let's not get too concerned about 'fighting against the will of the people,'' Fredrickson said. 'Let's help shape it. Let's help put in the right guardrails in place, and let's help build a system that we can be proud of and puts our patients first.' Hansen said a strong regulatory system could also save lives from over-reliance on opioids, which State Sen. Dan Quick of Grand Island echoed. Quick said he thought medical cannabis might one day be able to help his son who has struggled with opioid, drug and alcohol addiction for about 25 years. In that time, Quick said he and his wife have administered life-saving meds to reverse overdoses. 'I think this is an important bill that could help a lot of people, and we need to take that into consideration in what we're doing,' Quick said. State Sens. Megan Hunt and Dunixi Guereca, both of Omaha, said opponents also needed to grow up and embrace the modern acceptance of medical cannabis. 'The 1990s have called, and they want their 'Reefer Madness' back,' Guereca said. 'It is the year of our Lord 2025. Medical marijuana is not controversial.' Multiple opponents targeted Democrats for their support of LB 677 but opposition to other measures this year to water down voter-approved laws related to paid sick leave and minimum wage. In those cases, 32 of 33 Republicans support changing what voters approved, including Hansen. State Sen. Jane Raybould of Lincoln is the lone Democrat in favor of the sick leave and minimum wage changes, and she proposed the minimum wage tweaks. 'This bill's unnecessary, inappropriate, undermines the will of the people and implements recreational marijuana,' State Sen. Bob Andersen of north-central Sarpy County said. Hansen and State Sens. John Cavanaugh of Omaha, Danielle Conrad of Lincoln and George Dungan of Lincoln repeatedly pushed back and noted that backers of the medical cannabis ballot measure asked for LB 677, unlike supporters of the sick leave and minimum wage changes. Public support for medical cannabis was widespread in November, with majority approval in all 49 legislative districts for legalization and 46 of 49 districts favoring a regulatory system. Cavanaugh and Dungan said LB 677 was stricter than they would have liked but helped voters whose will Dungan said would 'once again be stifled' if LB 677 failed. Cavanaugh, who offered amendments to make the bill less restrictive, said its negotiated constraints were 'in the interest of accessibility, safety, reliability.' State Sen. Tanya Storer of Whitman called out 'political theater' and said part of the urgency for passing LB 677 was an effort by supporters of medical cannabis to get around legal challenges. 'Don't be fooled about the why, about the panic, about why the marijuana proponents are playing on your fear and emotion that we're going to have mayhem and chaos if we don't pass 677. If we pass it, we put it in state statute,' Storer said. Some senators, as well as Hilgers, have said LB 677 could weaken his office's pending appeal before the Nebraska Supreme Court alleging improper notarizations during the ballot measure process, which a Lancaster County District Court judge widely rejected in November, after the election. Ballot sponsors have also consistently denied wrongdoing. Some opponents flaunted that decision and said they hope the Nebraska Supreme Court 'gets it right,' including State Sen. Mike Jacobson of North Platte, who asked whether LB 677 would incentivize people to 'dummy up a bunch of signatures.' Jacobson and State Sen. Bob Hallstrom of Syracuse, a lawyer, repeatedly pointed to the fraud-focused case and said Hilgers was protecting the ballot measure process. 'Let's cool our jets. Let's slow down the pace,' Jacobson said. Conrad and the ballot sponsors have said it is Hilgers and Secretary of State Bob Evnen's alleged fraud case who are threatening the petition process and seek to 'ruin the lives of grassroots activists who peacefully petitioned their government for change.' Despite opponents' best efforts, Conrad said, the Legislature had already affirmed the ballot measures with an earlier cleanup bill passed Feb. 21 in a 48-0 vote: LB 1. Conrad also blasted some opponents for drumming up the very evidence that Lancaster County District Judge Susan Strong, a Ricketts appointee, had rejected, including texts among campaign volunteers. Conrad, citing Strong, said she found them 'completely out of context, legally irrelevant and cherry-picked.' 'To regurgitate them here on the floor of the Legislature, again, out of context, again, to sling mud, again, to drag moms of sick kids who are petitioning their government to try and find a cure, that says a lot about you,' Conrad said. Meyer said that even if signatures are ultimately tossed, and the state Supreme Court sides with Hilgers' appeal, voters' strong approval would still carry weight. Many of the same campaign volunteers, including all but one of the main notaries being targeted by the AG's Office, showed up for the debate. In the early hours of debate, one of the long-time advocates had seven seizures. Her mom helped start the legislative push more than a decade ago. Some volunteers said that while the defeat of LB 677 was a loss, they wouldn't stop fighting and would keep showing up. 'This issue isn't going away. I don't believe the people will let it go away,' said Crista Eggers, executive director of Nebraskans for Medical Marijuana, who described the defeat as an 'absolute failure.' Hansen predicted that LB 677's defeat could accelerate the push for recreational marijuana, as early as the 2026 election. That would come at the same time Pillen, Hilgers, Evnen, Ricketts and half of the seats in the Legislature are up for reelection. Another major theme of the debate was whether the Legislature should step in before the Medical Cannabis Commission has a chance to, as the Legislature has not yet considered or confirmed two final gubernatorial appointees. Both of those Pillen picks — Dr. Monica Oldenburg of Lincoln and Lorelle Mueting of Gretna — have a confirmation hearing Thursday. Each has consistently opposed the same measures that Eggers and other long-time supporters have fought for. Mueting opposed LB 677 but was 'neutral' on a much stricter bill from Storm. 'Why would we as a Legislature start messing with the commission that hasn't even started doing its work yet?' State Sen. Rob Dover of Norfolk asked during debate. But Hansen said the commission's broad authority and the apparent lean of the appointees could signal where the regulations ultimately end up, which he said does nothing but hurt patients. 'If they take the reins, they can choke it to death,' Hansen said of the commission. Four years ago, an earlier medical marijuana bill failed 31-18 in face of Republican opposition. Hilgers, a former state senator, opposed the 2021 bill, too. But unlike that narrow defeat, LB 677 faced one of the toughest fights for advocates in a decade, even as the 2025 debate came at a different political moment than in 2021. That includes Ricketts no longer being governor. He had said legalized marijuana would 'kill your kids.' It also includes overwhelming approval of the ballot measures. 'I think you know in your hearts that people deserve this, and you know in your hearts what's going to happen if we don't,' Hansen told his colleagues. 'The people voted for you to make a decision, not to push it off to somebody else.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Why is Nebraska mulling changes to voter-approved medical cannabis laws? It's complicated
State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair, center, speaks with Nebraskans after the third and final lawmaker-hosted public forum on medical cannabis, in Lincoln. May 5, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — The most common question many Nebraskans have asked of state lawmakers considering legislative regulations for new medical cannabis laws is, 'Why?' At a series of public forums this month in La Vista, Omaha and Lincoln, some supporters of medical cannabis asked why state senators were even entertaining Legislative Bill 677 a half-year after Nebraskans approved legalizing and regulating medical cannabis. Voters overwhelmingly approved two ballot measures last November. The one to legalize medical cannabis secured 71% approval. A companion regulatory measure won with 68% of the vote. The answer to why lawmakers are considering changing those laws largely has to do with setting aside state funds for the new regulatory commission voters approved and setting up additional guardrails in the face of bureaucratic and executive branch opposition to medical cannabis, limits on how much a ballot measure can accomplish in a single vote and continued legal challenges. Hansen has repeatedly said the way Nebraska handles medical cannabis could become the 'wild west' if the Legislature doesn't pass LB 677, largely because of the lack of funding. 'We will essentially have nothing in the State of Nebraska,' Hansen told reporters last week. 'You want to talk about denying the will of the voters, turning a blind eye to a ballot initiative that actually helps some individuals in the State of Nebraska who really need help? That's undermining the will of the voters.' Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers, who opposes medical cannabis and has supported efforts to stop the bill from being implemented, has argued that allowing the laws to take effect as-is would be better for the 'will of the people,' which Hansen rejects as 'false hope.' The sponsors of the medical cannabis ballot measures in Nebraska support Hansen's LB 677. Among the top concerns for the new voter-created Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission, which has sole regulatory authority over medical cannabis, is getting the regulatory process moving so physicians can recommend the medicine and patients can legally buy it in the state. While voters passed a regulatory measure setting a July 1 deadline to set new regulations and an Oct. 1 deadline to start licensing medical dispensaries, dispersing state funds is a power reserved to the Nebraska Legislature. This means the new regulators have no funding set aside for the new commission through the end of this fiscal year, June 30. The proposed state budget for the next two years would earmark an additional $30,000 for any Medical Cannabis Commission work taken on by Nebraska Liquor Control Commission employees. When voters approved creating the Medical Cannabis Commission, they assigned those additional duties to the three commissioners on the Liquor Control Commission. But the state budget creates no new and separate line item for the Medical Cannabis Commission. LB 677 provides a path to getting the commission more funding, though how much will be difficult in the face of a major projected budget deficit. The bill would also explicitly allow the commissions to share staff and resources. Nebraska attorney general steps up medical cannabis opposition, regulatory bill awaits debate Hilgers has argued the Medical Cannabis Commission should be drafting regulations anyway, despite a late March court filing from the commissioners that they have 'no ability to carry out any duties' outlined in the new laws without funding, such as creating open meetings notices or paying staff. As of March, that meant no meetings. No deliberations. No votes. No employees. No regulations. Some state lawmakers have also questioned an assertion from Hilgers, a former speaker of the Legislature, that the Liquor Control Commission could expend its already appropriated funds to regulate cannabis and then request those funds be reimbursed next year. Some senators question whether doing so would be allowed. The Legislature might not approve such a reimbursement, and Hilgers' office has vowed to sue the commissioners if they begin to license medical cannabis dispensaries anyway. LB 677 continues to face opposition from some state senators who look to Hilgers' ongoing and pledged legal challenges against the underlying cannabis laws as a reason for hesitancy. However, passage of LB 677 could weaken and possibly nullify a pending appeal to the Nebraska Supreme Court, led by Hilgers and a former state senator who has long opposed marijuana. Hilgers speculated last week that if LB 677 passed, 'it makes our job a lot more difficult to what we think should be a fair fight' in front of the Nebraska Supreme Court. His office has alleged widespread fraud in the ballot measure campaign, which organizers have denied and a Lancaster County District Court judge widely rejected in November, after voters had weighed in. The appeal from Hilgers' office argues that because the district court judge found at least some signatures from four notaries that should not have been counted — not enough to disqualify the petitions — as grounds for the thousands of signatures collected by those notaries to lose a 'presumption of innocence,' and require the campaign to 'cure' those signatures. None of the four targeted notaries have been criminally charged, Hilgers confirmed last week. 'Take away this pain': Families speak on proposed Nebraska medical cannabis regulations Should any medical cannabis dispensaries be licensed, Hilgers' office has planned to argue that the laws are preempted by the federal government, which continues to classify marijuana as a dangerous drug with no medical value. However, there have been steps under the Biden administration and now the Trump administration to reclassify the drug. Dozens of other states have implemented medical or recreational marijuana programs. 'I think two plus two is four, even if everyone else says two plus two is five,' Hilgers said last week. LB 677 would also provide immunity to health care practitioners who recommend medical cannabis to patients. Under Current law, Hilgers has said he would consider such recommendations a potential 'ethical violation' that could lead his office to investigate whether a recommending medical provider should lose a medical license. The Nebraska Medical Association, in a written comment letter for LB 677 earlier this year, voiced support for the measure's additional protections for medical providers. Securing the votes to get LB 677 out of the General Affairs Committee has required adding on a list of qualifying conditions, which excludes post-traumatic stress disorder, and prohibiting smoking as a permissible form of using medical cannabis. Under the original ballot measure, a patient or their caregiver only needed to get sign-off from a health care provider to use medical cannabis in any form, including smoking. While some senators and Hilgers argue smoking has never been a form of medicinal use, Nebraskans lined up one week ago to say that when they voted in November, they did so thinking all Nebraskans with a medical need could use cannabis in whatever form best worked for them. Some said they wouldn't have voted for the ballot measures otherwise. LB 677 would also amend the 5-ounce limit to state that no more than 2 ounces of that amount can be dried flower or bud, which could be manufactured into edibles, tinctures, ointments or other products. It would also add sales taxes to medical cannabis and direct tax revenue to property tax relief. Hansen has told supporters that while PTSD, for instance, was left out as a 'negotiating factor' to get the bill out of committee, the bill remains a 'moving target.' State Sen. John Cavanaugh of Omaha, vice chair of the General Affairs Committee, has already filed amendments to add PTSD or to leave all conditions up to a patient and their physician. 'Medical cannabis is legal,' Cavanaugh said. 'We need LB 677 to make it accessible and safe.' Some Nebraskans have voiced concerns that leaving all regulations up to the Medical Cannabis Commission, as current law does, could lead to more restrictions than under LB 677. Part of the reason is that the governor's two at-large appointments to the commission have opposed legislation concerning medical cannabis. One appointee opposed LB 677 at its March hearing. Why weren't all guardrails considered or presented to voters in November? In part, because the Nebraska Constitution's 'single subject' requirement for ballot measures limits what could be presented to voters to begin with. The ballot measures sought and created new state laws, rather than constitutional amendments, giving the Legislature the ability to amend the provisions with at least 33 votes, or a two-thirds majority. It was the third campaign in six years after numerous legislative bills stalled. Some Nebraskans have also drawn connections between LB 677 and pending legislative efforts to water down voter-approved minimum wage increases and paid sick leave requirements. Unlike those measures, medical cannabis supporters have partnered with Hansen. However, the trade-off in going through the Legislature is the necessity of garnering at least 33 votes, which on this issue would likely require all 15 Democrats, one progressive nonpartisan and 17 Republicans in the officially nonpartisan Legislature. The result would be stricter than at the ballot box, but supporters say it could be the best path forward for implementing the law. Hansen and campaign officials have said LB 677 presents an 'opportunity' to examine the medical cannabis programs in other states and create the best one for Nebraska. Hansen, a Republican with a Libertarian bent, has told supporters to share their stories and photos, mostly with his Republican colleagues, to get 33 votes. He said he's telling his colleagues to pass LB 677 and regulate medical cannabis, or the voters will end up legalizing recreational marijuana. State Sen. Jared Storm of David City, a lead opponent to Hansen's LB 677 who already views it as recreational, said he and others will prepare to fight the bill, if it is scheduled, to its max eight hours during first-round debate, which he said will be 'very divisive' and 'very tumultuous.' Lawmakers are running out of time as they are set to adjourn June 9. At a recent public forum, Hansen said incremental progress is showing 'the world hasn't ended' before lawmakers can return and expand LB 677. 'We're not going to eat 100% of the apple,' Hansen said. 'We get 75%, 80%, make sure the people who need it, you get it.' Nebraska Medical Cannabis Regulation Act (the voter-approved current law), in effect since December 2024 Allowable possession — 5 ounces of cannabis, no matter the product, with a health care practitioner's recommendation. Possible penalties — Qualified patients or caregivers are immune under state or local law. Permitted forms of use — Any, including smoking. Recommending practitioner — Any licensed physician, osteopathic physician, physician assistant or nurse practitioner, in Nebraska or elsewhere, practicing in compliance with state law. Patient/caregiver tracking — None. Products tracking — None. Dispensaries — No limit. Qualifying conditions — Any, as recommended by a physician. Sales taxes — None. Additional restrictions — Existing law, such as driving under the influence or prohibitions on smoking in public indoor spaces. Other regulations — Determined by Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission, the same three commissioners as the Nebraska Liquor Control Commission (all gubernatorial appointees) and up to two additional members appointed by the governor. Regulatory deadline — July 1, 2025. Licensing deadline — Oct. 1, 2025. Legislative Bill 677 with AM 1251, pending in the Nebraska Legislature 2025 Allowable possession — 5 ounces of cannabis, but no more than 2 ounces of which can be cannabis flower or bud, with a health care practitioner's recommendation. Possible penalties — Qualified patients or registered caregivers are civilly and criminally immune, including citation, arrest or prosecution. Health care practitioners are given similar protections, including for their licensure, if discipline is 'solely' because the doctor recommends cannabis or states that a patient is likely to benefit from medical cannabis. Permitted forms of use — Any, but not smoking. Recommending practitioner — A physician, osteopathic physician, physician assistant or nurse practitioner who primarily practices in Nebraska or an out-of-state practitioner who has treated the patient for at least 6 months. Patient/caregiver tracking — A registry system through the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission, including an application fee up to $45, valid for two years. Products tracking — 'Seed-to-sale' tracking of products and use of the state's prescription drug monitoring program, which is used for fentanyl or opioids, for example. Dispensaries — Up to 30 dispensaries, split 10 each per congressional district. Qualifying conditions — 15 conditions, created with the Nebraska Medical Association. Additional guidelines — Existing law, such as driving under the influence or prohibitions on smoking in public indoor spaces, plus: Cannabis must be grown, tested and distributed in Nebraska. Independent testing for contaminants (toxins, heavy metals or microbes). Products can't be made to look appealing to children and they must have clear labels, childproof packaging and warnings. No dispensary, growing facility or manufacturer can be within 1,000 feet of a college campus, alcohol or drug treatment center, school or daycare. Restrictions on cannabis use in the workplace or at schools. Prohibits the sale of cannabis mixed with nicotine or alcohol. Other regulations — Determined by Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission, the same three commissioners as the Nebraska Liquor Control Commission (all gubernatorial appointees) and up to two additional members appointed by the governor. At least one outside appointee must be a health care practitioner. Regulatory deadline — Oct. 1, 2025. Licensing deadline — March 16, 2026. Sales taxes — 5.5 cents per $1 purchase, plus local sales taxes. State sales taxes collected are directed to property tax relief. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
17-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Debate delayed on proposal to more frequently change Nebraska lawmaker compensation
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
Yahoo
13-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
HHS Committee advances two abortion-related bills to full Nebraska Legislature
State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair. March 22, 2023. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — Abortion appears likely to be debated on the floor of the Nebraska Legislature again this year after a legislative committee advanced two related bills on Wednesday night. The Health and Human Services Committee voted 5-0 to advance Legislative Bill 632 from State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair. That bill would require any health care facility performing and completing on-site elective abortions to dispose of the remains of the aborted fetus by cremation or burial, or, if not possible, in a manner directed by the State Board of Health. The committee also voted 4-2 to advance LB 512 from State Sen. Rick Holdcroft of Bellevue, which would require doctors to screen pregnant women for ectopic pregnancies and schedule a follow-up appointment 3 to 28 days after prescribing abortion-inducing medications. LB 632, from Hansen, is mirrored off of a Minnesota law adopted in 1987, which at least 15 other states also have adopted. The Minnesota law defines 'remains of a human fetus' to mean a fetus that has 'reached a stage of development so that there are cartilaginous structures, fetal or skeletal parts after an abortion or miscarriage.' Hansen's bill defines 'aborted unborn child' as 'physical remains of an unborn child at any stage of gestation whose life has been terminated by an elective abortion.' Hansen also noted that a Nebraska law from 2003 already requires licensed hospitals to have a written policy about the 'disposition of the remains of a child born dead at such hospital.' LB 632 would not require health care facilities to notify women who receive an abortion of the method of disposition. At his bill's hearing last week, Hansen said LB 632 is about public health and human dignity. 'All of us understand the horror that is felt when a human body has been subjected to indignity, desecration or neglect,' Hansen testified. 'Both reasons — public and environmental health and the basic respect to the bodies of the dead — are as applicable to the tissue and blood of children who have died by elective abortions as to babies who have died from natural causes.' Andi Curry Grubb, executive director of Planned Parenthood North Central States, blasted the bill as 'vague and unworkable' and said it would effectively impose a funeral requirement at any stage of pregnancy. She called the requirements 'shortsighted and disrespectful' and said the bill could impose religious or spiritual views. 'It does nothing other than burden abortion providers and patients, shame and stigmatize care and further remove patients' control over their own health,' Curry Grubb testified. 'All of these issues highlight that this bill is unserious and simply a political statement.' State Sen. Brian Hardin of Gering, chair of the HHS Committee, and Curry Grubb disagreed over whether the bill addressed 'human remains' or 'fetal tissue,' and Hardin asked what Planned Parenthood currently does with the remains after an abortion. 'What we do currently is completely in line with what most other health care providers who manage fetal tissue do,' she responded. Hansen responded that he had never seen a testifier 'grasp at so many straws.' On her religion allegations, he said his bill had 'nothing to do with that whatsoever' and that he wasn't seeking to restrict access to care. State Sen. Dan Lonowski of Hastings chose Hansen's bill as his 2025 priority, increasing the likelihood it will be scheduled for debate this year. 'Just to dispose of aborted remains in a haphazard way, I think it just lowers the dignity and the respect we should have for all human life,' Lonowski said Thursday. Opponents of Holdcroft's bill related to chemical abortions said it could put reproductive care farther out of reach or push them to find the medications in less safe or regulated ways. State Sen. Merv Riepe of Ralston, a Republican and former hospital administrator, opposed that bill. He said Wednesday that Holdcroft's bill wasn't about protection and was instead a blockade. State Sen. Glen Meyer of Pender countered that he viewed the bill as in the interests of women's health and that he would oppose the bill if it was a back-door attempt to ban access. Hansen noted Holdcroft's bill would not require women to show up for the follow-up appointment. State Sen. John Fredrickson of Omaha, the other 'no' vote, said voters had already weighed in. State Sen. Dan Quick of Grand Island was the lone senator not to vote for or against the bill, saying he was waiting until he understood more how the bill would impact women. Quick and Fredrickson were 'present, not voting' on Hansen's bill. Holdcroft confirmed Thursday that his bill is unlikely to get a priority designation this year, but said he would still work to find a path forward for his measure he said was 'pro-women's health.' 'We're going to just look for an opportunity on the floor to possibly amend it to a like bill and see what can be done there,' Holdcroft said. 'Otherwise, we'll carry it over to next year.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
