Latest news with #SteveYeager
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Politicians, scared of truly open primaries, offer ‘limited' alternative for nonpartisan voters
Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager (Photo: Richard Bednarski/Nevada Current) A ballot measure to establish an open-primary, ranked-choice voting system in Nevada may have been rejected by voters last November, but its underlying message of voter disenfranchisement clearly struck a chord with Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager. The Assembly's top Democrat, who opposed that ballot measure, said he suspects changes to Nevada's closed primary system are coming whether the political establishment wants it or not: 'The dam is going to break one way or another. The question is: Are we going to be part of the process?' To that end, Yeager is proposing Assembly Bill 597, which would allow nonpartisan voters to participate in either the Republican or Democratic primary. He introduced the bill as an emergency measure on Monday, a week before the end of the session, and presented it to the Senate and Assembly committees on legislative operations and elections during a joint meeting Thursday. Yeager described his bill as a 'pushing back' to Question 3, the election reform proposal approved by voters in 2022 but rejected by voters in 2024. That ballot measure, which needed to pass twice because it proposed amending the state constitution, was heavily funded by out-of-state election reform groups. Those groups viewed Nevada as 'a playground in which they can experiment,' Yeager said. 'We know they will continue to attempt to exploit this issue' of closed primaries 'to fool around with our elections.' AB 597 is 'much simpler' than Question 3. There would still be Republican and Democratic primaries. The only change would be that a registered nonpartisan voter could cast a ballot in one of them. (Question 3 proposed putting all candidates on the primary ballot regardless of political party, with the top five finishers appearing on the general election for voters to rank in order of preference.) Yeager described AB 597 as a common sense solution that addresses the growing number of nonpartisan voters in the state. As of April 2025, 34.9% of registered voters in Nevada are nonpartisan, 29% are Republican and 29% are Democrats, according to the Secretary of State's Office. The remaining 7% of registered voters are members of minor parties like the Independent American or Libertarian parties. That means nonpartisan and third-party voters are the biggest voting bloc in the state. Yet they are unable to participate in the primary elections their tax dollars pay for unless they agree to temporarily affiliate with a major political party. The Nevada State Democratic Party, which opposed Question 3, has not expressed support or opposition for AB 597. But Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, a Democrat and the state's top election official, spoke in support of the bill. The Nevada State Republican Party is strongly opposed to AB 597, as they were to Question 3. Representatives from the state party and affiliated local party groups argued that allowing nonpartisans to participate in party primaries would dilute party values and invite interference from outsiders. Opponents also argued the bill is unnecessary because nonpartisan voters can already participate in a primary by temporarily registering to a political party. Nevada offers same-day voter registration, which means nonpartisan voters have that option all the way through election day. 'I think that practically that just doesn't happen,' Yeager countered. 'People are not going to change party registration and then change back. They're not partisan for a reason or not affiliated for a reason.' Some election advocates worry nonpartisan voters may similarly be turned off by the process laid out in AB 597. Yeager plans to introduce an amendment to require nonpartisan voters request a political party primary ballot by 'the 7th Monday before the election day.' (In real terms: That would have been April 23 for last year's June 11 primary.) Nonpartisans after that date would have to vote in person. Yeager's proposed amendment would also keep the state-run presidential preference primary closed. Doug Goodman, the founder of Nevadans for Election Reform, has pushed for fully open primaries for more than a decade. He took a neutral position on AB 597, saying the bill is 'far from ideal' and only 'a small start.' The bill doesn't address disenfranchisement of voters registered to minor parties, who still would be unable to participate in a major political party primary without leaving their preferred party. It also doesn't address the issue of voters not being able to cast ballots in the significant number of races decided in competitive primaries where the winner goes on to run unopposed in a general election. That is a particularly common occurrence in districts that lean heavily toward one party. Sondra Cosgrove, another outspoken advocate for election reform in Nevada, took a similar position as Goodman, though she described herself as 'reluctantly in support' of AB 597. 'In America elections belong to the people, not the political parties,' she said in a statement to the Current. 'So, I plan to run a ballot question in 2026 to adopt a fully open primary so that the people of Nevada can discuss how we would like our primary election to be managed. Many political commentators believe major election reform will only come to Nevada through a ballot measure backed by outsiders because the existing political establishment benefits from the current system. The Legislature must adjourn Monday, leaving lawmakers only a few days to pass Yeager's bill. If they do, it could still be vetoed by Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo, who has already vetoed one election bill this session.
Yahoo
6 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Last-minute bill would let Nevada's nonpartisan voters join major party primaries for the first time
A last-minute bill offered by Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager would let non-partisan voters cast ballots in major-party primaries for the first time.
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Nevada bill would allow nonpartisans to vote in primary elections
LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — A proposal from Nevada Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager would allow nonpartisan voters in Nevada to vote in primary elections. Yeager, a Democrat, filed Assembly Bill 597 on Monday. Should it become law, the bill would affect both state and presidential primary contests. More Nevada voters identify as nonpartisan than any other group. As of April, out of the nearly 2.13 million registered Nevada voters, about 35% registered as nonpartisan. In April, Republicans carried a 170-person edge in voter registration. Both Republicans and Democrats account for 29% of voters, respectively. Last November, Nevada voters rejected a ballot question that would have mandated open primaries. However, the question also carried with it ranked-choice voting. Question 3 did not move forward after 53% of voters voted 'no.' The question passed in 2022. Ballot initiatives to amend the state constitution require two votes before moving forward. In 2021, the Nevada Legislature passed a law requiring primaries over caucuses. The Nevada Republican Party then sued. In 2024, the state held primaries for Democrats and Republicans, while the Nevada Republican Party held caucuses two days later. President Donald Trump did not appear on the primary ballot as state party leaders said any candidate who appeared on that ballot would be ineligible for delegates. Before the primary, Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo criticized party leaders, saying having caucuses was 'unacceptable for the voters.' Yeager's proposal was exempt from legislative deadlines, all of which have passed this close to the end of the legislative session, which ends June 2. A hearing on the proposal was scheduled before a legislative committee for Thursday, May 29. The state's next primaries are scheduled for June 2026. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Nevada governor vetoes bill to expand mail drop boxes before Election Day
LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — Republican Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo vetoed a proposal Thursday aimed at expanding ballot dropboxes. The proposal, Assembly Bill 306, would have required Clark County to establish 10 drop boxes be available between the end of early voting and the day before Election Day. The bill included smaller numbers for other counties. The proposal passed the Nevada Senate along party lines and in the Nevada Assembly with one Republican joining Democrats. 'Nevada is already among the easiest states in the nation to cast a vote,' Lombardo wrote in his veto message Thursday. 'AB 306 appears to be well-intentioned but falls short of its stated goals while failing to guarantee appropriate oversight of the proposed ballot boxes or the ballots cast. I believe additional election reforms should be considered as part of a larger effort to improve election security, integrity and allow Nevada to declare winners more quickly.' 'I am disappointed that Governor Lombardo vetoed AB306,' Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager said in a statement. 'AB306 was a bipartisan measure aimed at ensuring that voters, especially working families, seniors, and those with disabilities, have secure and accessible ways to return their mail ballots between the end of early voting and election day, allowing election workers to count votes quicker. However, I remain committed to protecting Nevadans' right to vote in a safe and secure manner and I look forward to working with Governor Lombardo over the waning days of session to find a mutually acceptable compromise.' Speaking with the 8 News Now Investigators after the 2024 general election, Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, a Democrat, said Clark County's tabulation infrastructure and the rush of ballots received on Election Day were to blame for delays. Nevada state law requires all mail-in ballots to be mailed and postmarked by Election Day. There is then a four-day period after Election Day when county clerks can accept the postmarked ballots and process them. If the ballot does not have a postmark, county clerks can process ballots up to three days after Election Day. Measures the Nevada Legislature put in place in 2021, alongside the mail-in voting law, scrubbed voter rolls of non-eligible and deceased voters. Just over half of Nevada's ballots cast in the 2022 general election were mail ballots, according to a thorough study released by the federal government. The state and counties routinely clear their rolls of inactive voters. In recent sessions, Republicans and Lombardo have pushed for election-related changes without success in the Democratic-controlled Legislature. Close margins often decide Nevada elections: In 2022, Nevada Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo won by about 15,000 votes; Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto won by about 8,000 votes. In 2020, former President Joe Biden won by about 33,000 votes. Nevada voters can opt in or out of receiving a mail-in ballot at Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Lawmakers advance proposal to cap insulin costs at $35 per month
Nevada could become the 27th state to cap the out-of-pocket cost of insulin for people on private insurance plans. (Photo Illustration by) Tens of thousands of Nevadans could pay less each month for insulin if lawmakers approve a proposed out-of-pocket cap on commercial insurance plans, according to the state Division of Insurance. Assembly Bill 555, sponsored by Speaker Steve Yeager, would prohibit private insurance companies from charging people more than $35 for a 30-day supply of a prescription insulin drug. The Senate and Assembly committees on commerce and labor in a joint meeting heard the bill Wednesday and immediately advanced it. Currently, no such cap on out-of-pocket insulin costs exists for private insurance companies, resulting in 'outrageous and unpredictable' prices for many Nevadans, according to Yeager. The Las Vegas Democrat told the committee he has heard of people paying up to $500 per month for insulin. Adam Plain from the Nevada Division of Insurance estimated there could be 70,000 Nevadans who have diabetes and are on private insurance plans regulated by the state. Private insurance makes up 18.6% of health care plans in the state, he said. Just under 11% of the adult population in the state has diagnosed diabetes, according to the American Diabetes Association. More broadly, the association estimated that nearly 270,000 people in Nevada have been diagnosed diabetic and an additional 70,000 have it but haven't been diagnosed. Twenty-six states, as well as the District of Columbia, have capped out-of-pocket insulin costs for commercial insurance plans, according to the association. Caps range from $25 in Connecticut to $100 bucks in Alabama and Delaware for a 30-day supply. With AB 555, Nevada policy would align with President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act, which established a $35 out-of-pocket insulin cost cap for people on Medicare. Yeager referenced research finding that the number of fulfilled insulin prescriptions rose after the cap provision went into effect, suggesting that fewer people are skipping or rationing their medications because of their high costs. Yeager called his legislation a 'partial answer' and acknowledged it would not help uninsured cash payers. The legislation also does not affect health care plans offered by public employers. During the hearing, Republican state Sen. John Ellison of Elko commented that President Donald Trump recently said he would lower the cost of all prescriptions. 'I thought that was so amazing,' Ellison added. Trump signed an executive order on May 12 aimed at lowering drug prices by pressuring pharmaceutical companies to align their U.S. pricing models with those in similarly wealthy countries. It has been panned by Democrats as unserious. Yeager did not comment on the executive order but said he generally 'would be all for' any federal action that goes beyond what he is proposing at the state level. At the same time, 'there is no reason' Nevada shouldn't do what it can while it can, he argued. AB 555 will provide financial relief to Nevadans feeling the effects of 'disastrous economic policies at the national level,' he'd said at an earlier point in the hearing, an obvious dig at Trump. 'It is incumbent on us at the state level to find solutions for them.' Groups supporting AB 555 include the Nevada State Medical Association, Nevada Women's Lobby, Retail Association of Nevada, and Battle Born Progress. The bill's only public opposition came from Americans for Prosperity, which believes the bill would interfere with 'the natural price mechanisms of the market' and comes with the risk of 'creating a cascade of unintended consequences.' The Nevada Association of Health Plans has taken a neutral position on the bill, but lobbyist Shelly Capurro said some of its 11 members had concerns about unintended consequences. After the hearing, during the meeting's general public comment period, Plain, the insurance regulation liaison for the state, addressed lawmakers as a private individual with diabetes. He thanked them for taking on the subject. He said that with the 'pretty good insurance' he gets as a state employee he pays $320 for a 90-day supply of insulin and three other medications, pen needles, and glucose monitoring. 'The list price for those four meds is $4,000 for a 90-day supply,' he added. Another Nevadan, Lisa Lynn Chapman, testified that when she first started taking insulin for her Type-2 diabetes, her needles and insulin were free. Then, her employer changed insurance and 'suddenly, my two different insulins cost $60 each, and my needles were $35 a month.' The cost, she added, was difficult to absorb. High costs are not what the three men who discovered and secured the patent rights for insulin wanted, Yeager told the joint committee in his closing. One of them, Frederick Banting, is famously quoted as saying, 'Insulin does not belong to me. It belongs to the world.' They sold their patents for $1 each to the University of Toronto in 1923. 'Somehow we are here in the year 2025 and people are paying $500 a month for something that was assigned patent rights for a dollar over a hundred years ago,' said Yeager. 'To me that is not and never will be acceptable.'
