15-05-2025
Pillen vetoes bill ending Nebraska lifetime SNAP ban for certain drug convictions
State Sen. Victor Rountree of Bellevue, center, talks with State Sens. Danielle Conrad and George Dungan, both of Lincoln. April 10, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)
LINCOLN — Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen late Wednesday vetoed a measure passed just hours earlier to end a lifetime ban preventing some Nebraskans from accessing SNAP benefits.
The veto of Legislative Bill 319, from State Sen. Victor Rountree of Bellevue, seeks to keep in place the status quo prohibiting anyone who has been convicted of selling or distributing a controlled substance from accessing Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits. People with three or more felonies for possessing or using a controlled substance also are ineligible.
The current law allows Nebraskans with one or two drug possession or use convictions to access SNAP if they have completed a licensed and accredited treatment program.
LB 319 would allow someone to access SNAP quicker if they have completed their sentence or are serving a term of parole, probation or post-release supervision.
Under Rountree's bill, a person with three or more felony convictions for felony drug possession or use could access SNAP only if they are participating in or have completed a licensed and accredited treatment program, unless a health care provider determines that substance abuse treatment is not needed.
Pillen said that would create 'loopholes' where 'habitual offenders' could evade treatment.
'Individuals that distribute or sell illicit drugs should not be entitled to taxpayer-funded benefits,' Pillen said in his one-page veto letter. 'Any illegal drug users should be required to complete treatment before they receive their third felony conviction.'
Versions of LB 319 have stalled in the past, the most recent led by State Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha. LB 319 passed 32-17, and Rountree said the veto wasn't a surprise. It takes 30 votes to override a veto, but senators sometimes fall to gubernatorial pressure on such motions.
Rountree, a pastor who serves on the Legislature's Judiciary Committee, said the bill is about forgiveness and restoration. He said food shouldn't be a 'bargaining chip' and that someone should be able to access food once they've served their time.
'SNAP is an opportunity for them to reenter, get back on their feet, and I don't believe that people want to stay on SNAP forever, as many times the story is written that way,' he said.
The bill was also supported by law enforcement, Rountree noted. He said helping Nebraskans with past felony drug convictions can restore their dignity and reduce bad interactions with law enforcement officials. At the bill's hearing, only the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services opposed the measure.
Rountree said the changes would also help maintain family integrity, noting that as a substitute teacher, he saw the power of food for young children.
Advocates, such as Derrick Martinez, who had previously been banned from SNAP, had urged Pillen to sign the bill just after its passage. In a statement, Martinez said LB 319 'shows that years of advocacy can actually pay off.'
'This moves the needle in a positive direction for not just me but for our state as it works to reduce recidivism,' Martinez said. 'This means less of a struggle, less anxiety, less pressure overall for myself and for others who have been banned from SNAP because of past convictions.'
Jasmine Harris, director of public policy and advocacy with RISE, a nonprofit focused on habilitative programming and reentry support, said the legislation would remove 'another unnecessary barrier to help people meet their basic needs after incarceration.'
Eric Savaiano, program manager for food and nutrition access at Nebraska Appleseed, said LB 319 also represented a 'huge win' for Nebraskans impacted by the 'failed' War on Drugs of the 1990s.
He said more than 1,000 Nebraskans would be able to 'better support themselves and their households with critical food assistance, helping them better meet their needs and not fall back into bad habits because of desperation.'
Rountree said the bill would let impacted Nebraskans know 'their life has value and meaning.'
Also Wednesday, lawmakers voted to modify a separate SNAP-related bill with an 'unfriendly amendment' that was resurrected after having been previously defeated.
The underlying LB 192, introduced by State Sen. Dan Quick of Grand Island, calls for an extension of current SNAP income eligibility levels, which otherwise would return in October to lower pre-pandemic eligibility levels.
State Sen. John Cavanaugh of Omaha made LB 192 his priority bill this session. DHHS, which administers the program, has estimated that more than 4,000 families could be disqualified for earning too much money if the older eligibility threshold is restored.
While the essence of LB 192 remained, State Sen. Bob Anderson of Sarpy County successfully revived an amendment that largely mirrors his LB 656, which would prohibit DHHS from seeking what he called 'blanket' waivers that make exceptions to SNAP work requirements, such as living in areas with high unemployment.
Andersen's amendment this time passed on a 28-8 vote — a contrast from the 22-14 vote that defeated it last month. It needed at least 25 votes.
The newly amended LB 192, on a voice vote, then moved back to final reading.
Quick, during debate, noted that Andersen's was an 'unfriendly' amendment. He opposed it and said if Andersen wanted to help 'strengthen' it, as Andersen said was his goal, he could have discussed it with Quick earlier.
Quick said the amendment 'puts barriers' in place for SNAP recipients who already comply with work requirements.
Andersen said his amendment still allows for six specific work exemptions, and is aimed at about 20,000 people who he said were able-bodied Nebraskans currently exempt from work and training requirements.
He said his amendment would get workers 'trained and employed.'
State Sen. George Dungan of Lincoln pointed out that the amendment at one point was estimated to cost $2.2 million in the first year and even more in the next. He said a new financial estimate reduced the cost to zero only because, instead of requiring DHHS to help find work for impacted SNAP recipients, it says the agency 'may' do so.
Cavanaugh objected to the amendment and said the 'permissive language' is 'another sleight of hand to put off the books, to unbalance our budget behind people's backs.'
State Sen. Tom Brandt of Plymouth said he was not opposed to strict work requirements but objected to Andersen's late change in the lawmaking process.
State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair was a fan of the amendment, saying it could result in able-bodied people getting back to work sooner. As for additional costs, he said: 'If the resources aren't there, they (DHHS) are not going to do it.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
