{"id":37108,"date":"2025-01-24T13:22:01","date_gmt":"2025-01-24T19:22:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/?p=37108"},"modified":"2025-01-24T16:43:50","modified_gmt":"2025-01-24T22:43:50","slug":"senators-change-present-not-voting-option-adopt-permanent-session-rules","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/?p=37108","title":{"rendered":"Senators change \u2018present not voting\u2019 option, adopt permanent session rules"},"content":{"rendered":"

Following three days of debate, lawmakers adopted their permanent rules Jan. 24. The rules of the Legislature govern the lawmaking process and generally are adopted at the beginning of each biennium.<\/p>\n

\"Sen.
Sen. Loren Lippincott<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Of the two dozen proposed changes heard by the Rules Committee at a public hearing last week, two were forwarded for consideration by the full Legislature. Central City Sen. Loren Lippincott, committee chairperson, said the other proposals would be studied over the interim.<\/p>\n

\u201cThese are rules that the whole committee agreed on unanimously and that provide for expediency and transparency in our processes,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

Committee proposals<\/strong><\/p>\n

First was a proposal originally offered by Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair, which allows for collective consideration of certain gubernatorial appointees.<\/p>\n

Currently, all gubernatorial appointees are considered by the committee with subject matter jurisdiction before being forwarded to the full Legislature for approval. That process will remain unchanged, but appointees other than agency or department heads who serve at the pleasure of the governor may be presented on the floor in a single report by each respective committee.<\/p>\n

Hansen said simplifying the consideration of noncontroversial appointments will increase legislative efficiency.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe\u2019re no longer dealing with just a few gubernatorial appointments,\u201d Hansen said, adding that the number has climbed into the hundreds in recent years.<\/p>\n

Under the proposal, if five lawmakers sign a letter indicating that they would like to \u201cpull\u201d a name from a committee report, that individual\u2019s appointment will be considered separately.<\/p>\n

Omaha Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh expressed concern that the change will not allow sufficient time for lawmakers with questions about a specific appointee to organize and file a pull request.<\/p>\n

\u201cI worry about making [the process] more obtuse and less transparent, not only to ourselves but to the greater public,\u201d Cavanaugh said.<\/p>\n

The proposal was adopted on a vote of 39-7.<\/p>\n

A second change, originally brought to the committee by Sumner Sen. Teresa Ibach, is intended to improve public access to statements of intent.<\/p>\n

Currently, the statements, which are a brief explanation of a proposed bill\u2019s purpose, must be submitted by the introducer to the chairperson of the committee the bill is referenced to at least three days prior to the measure\u2019s public hearing.<\/p>\n

As introduced at the Rules Committee hearing, Ibach\u2019s proposal would have changed that timeline to instead require a statement of intent to be submitted within one day of a bill\u2019s introduction.<\/p>\n

Ibach said that during the hearing it was noted that bills must be referenced to a standing committee of subject matter jurisdiction before a statement of intent can be submitted to the chairperson.<\/p>\n

As a result, she said, her proposal was amended to require submission within three legislative days of a bill being referenced to committee.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is aimed to help those watching at home or outside of the building to know the general concept of a bill at the time of its introduction,\u201d Ibach said.<\/p>\n

Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha offered what she termed a \u201ccautionary observation\u201d in regard to the proposal, noting that there is no penalty for failing to comply with the timeline for submitting a statement of intent, neither currently nor under the proposed change.<\/p>\n

\u201cChange for the sake of change isn\u2019t an improvement on the process,\u201d Hunt said.<\/p>\n

The proposal was adopted 41-2.<\/p>\n

Amendments<\/strong><\/p>\n

Lawmakers also approved an amendment offered by Omaha Sen. Kathleen Kauth.<\/p>\n

A version of the proposal, which would have changed the way votes are calculated on all cloture motions, was offered at the Rules Committee hearing but not forwarded for debate.<\/p>\n

A cloture motion \u2014 which ceases debate and forces a vote on a bill \u2014 requires approval by a two-thirds majority of the 49 members of the Legislature, or 33 votes.<\/p>\n

Kauth\u2019s revised amendment does not alter the two-thirds threshold, but requires the votes of senators who are present but not casting a vote to be officially recorded as having voted “nay” rather than \u201cpresent not voting,\u201d if the vote is on a cloture motion that is offered during the third and last round of legislative debate, known as final reading.<\/p>\n

It will do the same for votes taken on the question of final passage of a bill.<\/p>\n

Kauth acknowledged that there may be strategic reasons for a senator to refrain from voting during earlier rounds of debate \u2014 to signal willingness to negotiate, for example \u2014 but said senators should be required to \u201cmake a final stand\u201d during final reading.<\/p>\n

\u201cI think we owe it to our constituents to give transparency and accountability to this process,\u201d Kauth said.<\/p>\n

The final version of her amendment also contains a provision that allows members who file a conflict of interest statement on any vote taken under the rule to be recorded as present not voting rather than as a no vote. Such votes will be noted with an asterisk in the official legislative record.<\/p>\n

Hansen supported the change, saying he has heard from many Nebraskans who are upset by lawmakers who are present in the legislative chamber but do not cast a vote.<\/p>\n

\u201cI feel like this is a constituent-driven rule change,\u201d Hansen said.<\/p>\n

Sen. Bob Andersen of Omaha agreed, saying his constituents made their expectations clear to him on the campaign trail.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat they did tell me is that when they elected me, they elected me to vote thumbs up or thumbs down. Either vote pro or against,\u201d Andersen said.<\/p>\n

Speaking against the change, Hunt said the frustration some constituents feel about the issue is understandable, but that the solution should not be to force lawmakers to vote when their conscience or ethics lead them not to do so.<\/p>\n

\u201c[It] forces senators into these binary choices \u2014 are you a yes or a no \u2014 and it doesn\u2019t recognize the complexity that a lot of these issues have,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

Lincoln Sen. George Dungan also opposed the change. The Legislature already maintains clear records of how members vote, he said, including those who are present but not voting.<\/p>\n

Kauth\u2019s change does nothing to provide transparency or accountability for constituents, he said, but rather will simply be used to gain partisan political advantage. It\u2019s up to senators to explain their actions to their constituents, he said, not for members to dictate to each other when they must cast a vote.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat I fear is that we\u2019re trying to change this rule \u2014 to force a \u2018present not voting\u2019 to show up as a \u2018no\u2019 \u2014 so that it can be used in campaigns,\u201d Dungan said.<\/p>\n

Senators voted 31-17 to adopt the change.<\/p>\n

Lawmakers also considered an amendment offered by Omaha Sen. Terrell McKinney that would remove a cap on the number of bills an individual senator can introduce each session, which was set at 20 last year.<\/p>\n

McKinney said capping the number of bills that members of the Legislature may introduce, but not the number of bills the governor can have senators introduce on his or her behalf, creates an imbalance of power among the two branches of government.<\/p>\n

In addition, he said, the current rule makes it difficult for lawmakers to adequately address the needs of those they represent.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis limitation effectively stifles the voice of the people,\u2019 McKinney said, \u201cmaking it challenging for senators to effectively respond to constituent concerns.\u201d<\/p>\n

Several senators, including Hunt, called the current cap arbitrary and unnecessarily constraining. She noted a number of ways senators have found to circumvent the existing rule, including having another senator introduce proposals for them if they have reached their own bill limit.<\/p>\n

Hansen, who introduced the rule change that led to the cap\u2019s adoption in 2024, said it was \u201cpremature\u201d to rescind it. Senators introduced roughly 100 fewer bills this session than in 2023, which he said is an indication that the limitation is working as intended.<\/p>\n

In response to McKinney\u2019s concerns, Seward Sen. Jana Hughes offered and later withdrew an amendment to his proposal that also would apply the cap to bills introduced on the governor\u2019s behalf.<\/p>\n

Hughes said she decided the proposal should go through the committee process before being considered by the full Legislature, however. As a result, she said she would study the issue over the interim and consider offering the proposal again in the future.<\/p>\n

The McKinney amendment failed 16-31 and lawmakers then voted 33-6 to adopt the permanent rules.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Following three days of debate, lawmakers adopted their permanent rules Jan. 24. The rules of the Legislature govern the lawmaking process and generally are adopted at the beginning of each biennium.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":37111,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"colormag_page_container_layout":"default_layout","colormag_page_sidebar_layout":"default_layout","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[290],"tags":[286],"class_list":["post-37108","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-rules","tag-sen-loren-lippincott"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/RulesGroup1-22-25a.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37108","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=37108"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37108\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":37130,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37108\/revisions\/37130"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/37111"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=37108"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=37108"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=37108"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}