The State Line

Just when you thought everyone was tuning up to hold hands, sing “Kumbaya” and proclaim peace and harmony at the end of the 2012 session, the Legislature rediscovered its role as a separate wing of government.

 It could bring a wild finish to the session, which is now expected to end April 19 or 20.

 On Tuesday, lawmakers not only overrode Gov. Dave Heineman’s veto of $2.5 million in payments to child-welfare subcontractors that had not been paid, but they gave first-round approval to a bill the governor has decried more than any other measure.

 We’re talking about providing taxpayer-funded prental care for poor women, who also happen to be in the country illegally.

 Heineman’s anti-illegal immigration views helped propell him past NU football coach Tom Osborne in the 2006 Republican gubernatorial primary.

 And the governor has stuck to his guns on the issue, saying that despite the widely held recognition that proper prenatal can prevent birth defects and death of infants, he cannot condone using taxpayer funds to help illegal immigrants.

 His very public outcry on the issue in 2010 helped sink a bill proposed that year to resurrect the prenatal care, which had been provided by Nebraska taxpayers (probably unknowingly) for decades. 

 But legislators — at least 30 on Tuesday — say they see the issue differently.

 That unborn child, even if carried by a mother here illegally, is a life. And, that child, once they are born, will automatically become a U.S. citizen, and entitled to taxpayer-funded health care. They deserve to be healthy, senators said, they deserve to live without a life of struggles with preventable birth defects.

 Lincoln Sen. Kathy Campbell told colleagues that one case in Nebraska, involving a child of an immigrant mother who lacked prenatal care, ended up costing taxpayers $800,000 in intensive care bills.

 Given that the estimated cost of the prenatal bill, LB 599, is about $650,000, it became pretty clear that the cost of extending care to 1,100 women would save the state money if only that sad case was avoided. 

 And, a Columbus public health clinic has reported four deaths of unborn children they suspect were linked to the lack of prenatal care.

 Gov. Heineman will push back, and the normally news conference-shy governor has already scheduled a news conference for Wednesday morning to bark at the audacity of state legislators. And there’s no guarantee that there will be 30 votes to overcome the expected gubernatorial veto.

 But the votes on Tuesday were another indication that the 49 senators are learning that they are a separate wing of government, that can stand up when they disagree with the occupant of the northeast corner office in the State Capitol.

Becoming a mother hasn’t mellowed the rhetorical fire of State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln.

 Conrad, one of the most passionate floor speakers in the Legislature, turned up the heat on Thursday in an almost single-handed protest over the much-amended tax-cut package pushed by Gov. Dave Heineman.

 It featured a healthy dose of partisanship. Conrad is a dedicated Democrat and Heineman as Republican as they come.

 But Conrad is also a member of the Legislature’s Appropriations Committee, which keeps a keen eye on the state budget. And she sees a fiscal train-wreck ahead after the Legislature adopts LB 970.

 And the Legislature will adopt the tax-cut package, which has been slimmed down to a cost of about $56 million a year (from the original $130 million).

 It is a tax cut in mostly name only now. After it fully goes into effect, it would amount to just over $5 a month for a married couple with $50,000 in adjusted gross income. It would be about $12 a month for a couple with an income of $100,000 or higher. Every cent helps, it can be argued.

 Conrad was totally correct when she said that it was not good policy but “politics” that led to the passage.

 There wasn’t much money to spend this year, and the conservative path would have been to put most of it in the state’s rainy day fund, which helped Nebraska weather the recent recession.

 But the governor made a tax cut his top priority. He worked it hard, threatening to veto some bills of senators if they didn’t go along with it. That is how the game is played.

 Those seeking re-election this year, or higher office in future years, were hard pressed to vote against LB 970. That is the reality of the political game, too.

 But Conrad made some good points.

 Nebraska hasn’t, traditionally, cut taxes when budget deficits loom ahead, she pointed out.  And committing the state to a tax cut means that other state spending — like K-12 education or higher ed — might have to be cut in the future. After all, no one rescinds a tax cut.

 Conrad, who gave birth to her first child before the 2012 session began, may get to say “I told you so” in a year or so.

Crunch time has arrived for the Nebraska Legislature. The calendar shows only 10 more days in the session while 26 bills named as senator, committee or speaker priorities have yet to come up for debate for the first time. 

Some on the list are expected to consume hours of time – a measure to shrink the Omaha Public School board, a proposal to let cities raise sales taxes by a half-cent, a bill limiting cities’ ability to levy occupation taxes. And some awaiting second-round debate also could eat up the clock — legalizing gambling on historic horseraces, to name one.  

Every legislative session hits a point where the time available and the bills yet to be considered appear on a collision course. That was the point in the session when former Speaker of the Legislature Kermit Brashear always expressed frustration at questions about the seeming impossibility of getting through everything. “There will be time for everything that needs to get done,” was his typical response.

Most years there is. The looming deadline and a few legislative days that last well into the night and skillful scheduling by the Speaker usually do the trick. They produce compromises that speed bills along and make it possible to fit more into the time available. Meeting four days a week also helps give time for negotiations.

Despite a 36-6 vote this week granting first-round approval of the state’s, ever-shrinking tax-cut package, we may yet see more drama over the plan.

 The $55 million-a-year tax cut package, while a shadow of its original self, might become controversial again if some budget items are vetoed by Gov. Dave Heineman.

 That would set off some senators, who agreed to vote for the smaller tax-cut package, feeling that it would fit in the budget along with their own spending priorities.

 There’s still some budget items the governor may not like, including the $2.5 million in state claims the Legislature is approving in connection with the unpaid bills to child-welfare providers in central and western Nebraska. There’s also been talk of vetoes of increased funding for services for the developmentally disabled, and for rates paid to hospitals, nursing homes and others to provide government-funded medical services.

 But there’s a sense around the Unicameral that some senior lawmakers will stand their ground this year, and resist any vetoes.

 That will set up a test of wills, again, over what are the state’s top priority — tax cuts or partially restoring state services trimmed during the recession.

 The budget bills will be up on the agenda on Tuesday. That would give the governor until April 2 to approve or veto the spending items. It could get interesting.

 And, a big “wow” to this week’s photo-finish advancement of the historic horse-racing bill. The 26-18 vote marked the first time in a long time that a bill to benefit the state’s ailing horse-racing industry (or any gambling bill for that matter) moved beyond the talking stage.

 But whether this horse hits the finish line is far from determined. There’s still two more rounds of debate. And standing at the finish line will be Gov. Heineman, who is against expanded gambling.

State Sen. Amanda McGill of Lincoln introduced a measure to get tougher on human sex trafficking in Nebraska but she missed the first-round debate and vote the bill Wednesday. The issue has been one of her priorities but it conflicted with an invitation to the White House for a belated St. Patrick’s Day celebration with President Barack Obama and Ireland’s Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Enda Kenny.

Invitees to the reception included a number of elected officials of Irish descent. McGill, who looks every bit the Irish lass with her red hair and fair skin, said she got the invitation because of her Irish heritage and her involvement with the Young Elected Officials Network, a group for moderate and progressive elected officials. She said she believes her Irish ancestors came to the United States sometime during the mid-1800s.

The prime minister gave Obama a bowl of shamrocks, a tradition dating back several administrations. Kenny also presented the president with a certificate acknowledging Obama’s Irish roots. McGill said the president joked he would hang next to his birth certificate. Obama’s birth certificate has, of course, has been the source of controversy among some people who question whether he was born in the United States.

The evening also featured music by Maryland Gov. Martin O’Mally’s Celtic rock band. McGill got a chance to meet the president in the receiving line. She encouraged him to visit Nebraska where, she reminded him, he got one enthusiastic electoral vote. He promised to try to make it back.

A significantly slimmed down package of tax cuts, first proposed by Gov. Dave Heineman, appears steaming toward passage after 36-6, first-round approval on Tuesday night.

 How slimmed down?

 The current version of LB 970 is about one-third as large as the governor’s original proposal ($95 million over three years versus $326 million), and drops the idea of eliminating the inheritance tax that is paid to counties. Also gone are cuts in state corporate income taxes.

 The remaining cut in individual income taxes won’t be big — a married couple with $50,000 in adjusted gross income would get only $67 a year, or less than $6 a month. That’s about a Runza combo meal.

 But it’s still a tax cut, which was the governor’s top priority this year.

 Some observers weren’t giving Heineman’s proposal much of a chance this year, but the former Army Ranger dug in his heels, and State Sen. Abbie Cornett kept pushing to see what the Legislature’s budget-writers would accept.

 The effort seemed to point out the value of seniority in the Legislature, and point up the loss of expertise that’s coming when senators like Cornett and Lavon Heidemann will be term limited at the end of the year.

 Heidemann, who chairs the budget-deciding Appropriations Committee  (and others on his committee) dug in his heels, too. They and insisted that the state could not afford more than $50 million a year in less revenue due to tax cuts. It takes some time, and experience, to know you can’t forego tax revenue that you don’t have, or else you’re asking for some painful cuts in state services. Credit Heidemann for that.

 It also took some experience from Cornett to know how hard you can push, and what buttons to push, in putting together a tax-cut plan that probably had less than a 50-50 shot only a week ago.

  State legislators face an interesting choice in the next couple of weeks: whether to place on the ballot separate proposals to increase legislator salaries and to increase term limits to three, four-year terms instead of the current two. Some say you can’t put both issues up for a vote on the same year, and you need to pick one or the other.

 While there’s little argument that senators are overpaid, the argument to keep the term limits proposal got a decent endorsement on Tuesday.

This is the funny time of year at the Nebraska Legislature.

 Deals are being made, deals are falling apart, deals are getting messed up. And tempers are rising.

 On Friday, state lawmakers started a debate on part of Gov. Heineman’s deal to get his tax-cut package passed. The state’s education lobby was fine with not accepting an increase in state aid, accepting the fact that the state couldn’t afford it.

 But that fell apart when the governor kept pushing his tax-cut package, saying the state could afford the $150-million cost over three years.

 So, to appease the educators, there’s now a proposal to give an additional $10 million a year to schools in special education funding. We’ll see if that’s a deal senators can accept.

 Another deal fell apart earlier this week. State Sen. Ken Schilz of Ogallala had introduced a bill on behalf of Attorney General Jon Bruning to outlaw dangerous drugs sold as legal “bath salts” in those head shop-like stores that still exist.

 But Schilz didn’t chose his bath salts bill as his priority bill, so there’s some doubt that the measure — which has broad support — will come up this year.

 He ran into a buzzsaw of opposition earlier this week, led by Omaha Sen. Brenda Council, when he tried to attach his bill to another piece of legislation moving through the Legislature. The furor, in large part, was generated because Schilz choose to prioritize a much more controversial bill — to require ID to be presented before someone can vote — rather than the balt salt measure. No one is filibusters bath salts, but they are voter ID.

 And one deal was totally messed up earlier this week after Omaha Sen. Burke Harr introduced the wrong amendment to a bill. Muncipalities, counties and other governmental entities have been trying to get a clarification in state law to ensure that government facilities financed by non-profit leasing corporations are tax-exempt.

But some questions arose during debate, and lobbyists for the City of Omaha and others were scrambling to draw up an amendment that everyone could agree with. But there was some miscommunication.

 Senators voted to approve Harr’s amendment, relying on his explanation rather than reading the amendment. It wasn’t the first time that has happened. But it doesn’t happen very often, and usually it’s caught before an amendment is approved, and a bill advanced.

 The bill is expected to be pulled back and fixed.

 It’s all part of the funny business at this time of year.

Ordinary citizens trying to follow legislative action might be pardoned if they get a little confused by the Nebraska Legislature’s daily agenda. Rather than a simple list of bills to be taken up in order, the agenda shows a multiplicity of bill “divisions.” Each division is identified a senator’s name and the order of divisions changes from day to day and week to week. It can be baffling for people trying to predict when lawmakers may debate a particular issue.

Here’s the explanation, from Speaker of the Legislature Mike Flood of Norfolk. Setting the daily agenda is one of the speaker’s key duties. Flood adopted the division method of scheduling from his predecessor, former Sen. Kermit Brashear of Omaha. Flood said the method makes good use of legislative time and energy. It allows lawmakers to alternate between easier issues and issues that generate long, often draining debate, while finishing each week with some accomplishments.

“It’s hard to put in three very difficult bills in a row,” he said. “The Legislature needs a chance to breathe.”

Typically divisions start with an easy bill, then work up in controversy level. Most are named for the introducer of the last bill in the division. Some divisions group bills with similar content, such as this year’s child welfare legislation, to allow for more focused debate.

Flood moves the divisions around each day after looking at a variety of factors, such as the expected length of debate and other items on lawmakers’ schedules. As the session moves on, he often puts divisions on the agenda to be taken up at a specific time. And if that time happens to be just before a major social event so lawmakers are eager to vote and get going? Well, a smart speaker uses every tool in the box to keep debate moving and get decisions made.