Three thoughts …

Among the tasks waiting for the Nebraska Legislature when it reassembles after the first of the year will be a budget shortfall, the perennial pitch for lower property taxes and a roster of issues from education to fulfilling the wishes of the electorate … finally.

State senators also will be dealing with a couple personnel issues during the 60-day session, a pair of stinkers that have already occupied a considerable amount of time not simply for lawmakers but for the state’s body politic.

The lowlights: First, the Unicameral’s Executive Committee has unanimously recommended the expulsion of one of the Legislature’s sitting members for what it deemed a “pattern of behavior,” but nevertheless propelled by an incident at a sine die celebration last spring. Jettisoning a sitting senator requires a vote of the entire Legislature, and 33 members would have to agree to the dismissal.

Senators also may weigh in on whether or not to impeach a member of the University of Nebraska Board of Regents after her arrest for felony drunken driving. She stands accused of causing a crash that seriously injured a passenger in the other vehicle. A state senator has vowed to introduce a legislative resolution to impeach the regent.

If a simple majority (25 votes) of the full Legislature agrees, the regent is suspended while the Nebraska Supreme Court hears the case. State law requires five of the seven justices to agree to convict and remove the regent permanently.

I’ll let others consider the merits of both situations. Opinions on each are easy to find. While the cases must go forward, we should remember that Nebraskans send their elected representatives to Lincoln to solve problems and create good laws and policy. These two sadly necessary tasks do neither.

Eyes On The Prize

Some of the Legislature’s collective eyes appeared to be on the right prizes at a public forum last week at which a panel of seven Lancaster County area state senators talked about the upcoming session and some of their priorities.

The legislators were forthcoming in fielding audience questions and — for the most part — free of non-answer answers, a linguistic subterfuge far too common among politicians hoping to avoid the truth. The panel’s candor cheered me.

Based on their feedback, the short session, which begins Jan. 7, will challenge senators to right the budgetary ship, create solid tax policy, consider the body’s response to the will of the people via ballot initiatives and address a host of other pressing issues from broadband access to an infusion of fairness into the Homestead Act.

What we didn’t hear from any of the seven — gratefully — was that the session should take time debating what books children should be reading in Nebraska classrooms, who should be using what bathrooms or if the Unicameral will look further to erase gains made from efforts boosting diversity, equity and inclusion, the federal government’s latest bogeyman.

In a 60-day session, senators have precious little time to waste on such “issues.” Come to think of it, neither do they in a 90-day session.

Fixing Things That Need Fixing

Nebraska has become the first state to add work requirements for recipients of Medicaid, the initial nod to the “Big Ugly” bill Congress passed and the president signed last summer. One idea being trafficked here is that a work requirement will curb “waste, fraud and abuse” in the Medicaid system, the now-ubiquitous reasoning for gutting government programs.

Such thrift is a worthy goal even if most Nebraskans, Medicaid recipients and non-Medicaid recipients, have yet to see a hard number of just how much waste, fraud and abuse we have going on in these environs.

Public health policy researchers at KFF report that the majority (75%) of the 346,000 Nebraskans who get Medicaid benefits already work. Many of the remaining recipients are exempt because of poor health, age or school. Others are caregivers.

State public health advocates warn that the cart is before the horse here, that systems to administer the work requirement processes are not ready to handle the “access and capacity” issues that will rise as the new rules take effect. The consequences may move many off Medicaid — even some that may be working.

Optimal efficiency in social safety net programs is necessary. Recipients able to work should, to remain eligible. Nor is anyone suggesting we entertain Scrooge’s famous seasonal insensitivity of “prisons and workhouses.”

Still, as this space has argued before, government largesse is an expansive universe, and those who benefit should be treated with equity and fairness, regardless of their income level or ability.

This story was published by Nebraska Examiner, an editorially independent newsroom providing a hard-hitting, daily flow of news. Read the original article: https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/12/22/necessary-tasks-challenging-sess...