The official site of the Nebraska Unicameral Legislature

Sen. Lydia Brasch

Sen. Lydia Brasch

District 16

The content of these pages is developed and maintained by, and is the sole responsibility of, the individual senator's office and may not reflect the views of the Nebraska Legislature. Questions and comments about the content should be directed to the senator's office at

Week 1 of the 2nd session of the 105th Legislature consisted of days 1 through 3 of this session.

Wednesday, January 3rd marked the beginning of the second half of the biennium of the105th Legislature and the first day of my final legislative session as State Senator for District 16.  Looking back, it has been incredible and a tremendous privilege to serve the people of District 16 the past seven years.  I look forward to representing you in this final session and working for our district until my successor takes office the first Wednesday in January 2019.

On day two of the session and on behalf of the State Treasurer, I introduced legislation to bring state tax law into line with the new federal law.  The proposed changes to the Nebraska educational savings plan will encourage Nebraskans to save for education and prioritize the future.  These changes would take effect Jan 1, 2020.  I also introduced a bill that would make a clarification in the notice requirements under the fence law before a landowner may file a fence dispute claim and a bill that will insert a requirement for the Director of Agriculture to prepare an annual report of revenues and expenditures for the potato promotion program.

Week two of the session begins with floor debate on proposed changes to the Legislature’s rules followed by debate on carryover bills from the first session of the biennium.  LB 105, which advanced from committee last session, will likely be one of the first bills the Legislature will take up during the first week of floor debate.  This bill increases certain bankruptcy exemptions that have not been updated since 1997.

On Wednesday, January 10th, Governor Ricketts will present the annual state-of-the-state address where he will present his budget proposals and lay out his legislative priorities for the year.  The Governor’s budget is the blueprint the Legislature will use to address a nearly $200 million gap between current budget commitments and anticipated revenues.   In October, the Economic Forecasting Board lowered its projected tax receipts for the two-year budget cycle by another $100 million.

It is anticipated that the Governor will also use the state-of-the-state address to introduce new proposals for property tax relief and income tax reform.  LB 461, which contained a version of a bill I introduced to adopt an income approach to valuing agricultural land for tax purposes, stalled during floor debate last session.  Critics of the bill felt it did not offer enough in terms of direct property tax relief.   In addition to the Governor’s proposals for tax relief, the Legislature will consider a competing proposal to allow taxpayers to claim a refundable credit against state income tax equal to 50% of property taxes assessed for schools.

Additionally, the Office of the Attorney General will launch an awareness campaign to fight sex trafficking called Demand An End on January 11th at the Capitol.

This session is a “short session”, lasting 60 working days and concluding on April 18th.  New bills may be introduced during the first 10 days of the session.  667 bills were introduced during the 2017 session.  During the shorter session, Senators typically introduce 400-450 new bills and at the end of the third day, 207 bills had been introduced.  Each new bill will be assigned to the appropriate committee for a public hearing.  Hearings will begin January 16th and will conclude at the end of February.  You are welcome to attend the hearings, provide testimony via mail or email, or testify yourself. You can follow along with all of the legislative activity at

Please contact me; my administrative aide, Courtney McClellen; or my legislative aide, Jacob Campbell, with questions or concerns at (402) 471-2728 or by email at; or stop by Room 1022 in the Capitol.


June 2, 2017


Brett Waite

Legislative Aide

(402) 471-2728


Senator Brasch to serve on national and regional committees

Senator Brasch has been selected by the Council of State Government (CSG) to serve on the Intergovernmental Affairs Committee, the Interbranch Affairs Committee, and Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee.

The Intergovernmental Affairs Committee sets the federal-state relations agenda for CSG. It is particularly concerned about federalism issues and states’ rights. The bipartisan committee is comprised of officials from all branches of state government. CSG’s Interbranch Affairs Committee helps foster collaboration among and between the branches of state government. The Agriculture and Natural Resource Committee examines issues affecting rural communities, including rural economies, agriculture, energy, forestry, and wildlife of the individual states and of the region as a whole. The committee’s focus is on the approaches policymakers have taken to promote the related industries and the impact of federal policies on the industries and on the land and people involved.

Senator Brasch has also been selected by the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) to serve on the Communications, Financial Services, and Interstate (CFI) Committee and to the Natural Resources and Infrastructure (NRI) Committee. The former committee is responsible for protecting states’ interests in federal decisions regarding electronic commerce, banking, insurance, securities and other financial services issues, interstate commerce and taxation of electronic transactions, telecommunications and interstate business activity taxes. The latter committee has jurisdiction over state and federal energy, environment, agriculture and transportation programs, legislation, regulations and policies.

CSG is a multi-branch organization that provides state officials in all three branches of government with information regarding social, economic, and political trends, as well as policy responses to changing conditions. NCSL is a national organization that advocates for the power and authority of state legislatures. This organization has helped states remain strong and independent by giving them the tools, information, and resources to devise solutions.

Senator Brasch expressed her enthusiasm of being chosen by these organizations. “I am humbled and excited for the opportunity to work with lawmakers from other states as we seek to implement good government and solve the problems facing the citizens in our respective states. These two organizations provide a wealth of policy research and information for state officials.”


As chairperson of the Legislature’s Agriculture Committee, and an ag producer, I’m humbled and proud to promote the successes of agriculture. But even more important is to continue to work on solutions for the challenges facing Nebraska’s farmers, ranchers, and the rural economy, including burdensome property taxes.

I’m excited about all the future opportunities for Nebraska agriculture, such as our continued success with ethanol. As a leading producer of ethanol, Nebraska ranks second nationally, which is why I’m pleased to join Governor Ricketts in celebrating Renewable Fuels Month. It’s been a difficult road to develop the ethanol industry, but the return on that investment has been tremendous for the communities that are home to ethanol plants, the workers at those plants and their families, our farmers and ranchers, and our state’s overall economy.

In February, during the National Ethanol Conference, Bob Dinneen, president of the Renewable Fuels Association, expressed concerns about the future of the Renewable Fuels Standards (RFS) beyond 2022. He said “[t]he debate on Capitol Hill is shifting away from repealing the RFS to reforming it after 2022, when the congressionally mandated volumes proscribed in the law are removed and replaced with largely unfettered discretion by EPA to set future standards for all renewable fuels. We need to be active…participants in that debate.”

I agree with Dinneen. I’m not comfortable with leaving the fate of this important industry in the hands of the EPA, which has proven to be a burdensome bureaucracy that lacks accountability and appreciation for the importance of ethanol to the rural economy. To leave the destiny of corn-based ethanol under the complete control of the EPA beginning in 2023 is unthinkable. As we celebrate Renewable Fuels Month, let us also be mindful that we must work to secure the future of the ethanol industry.

State Senator Lydia Brasch

Week twenty of the first session of the 105th Legislature consisted of days 82 through 85 of this session.

Originally the Speaker scheduled adjournment “sine die” for the 90th day on June 2, but the last day this session will instead be day 86 on May 23, ending four legislative days earlier.  It is estimated that early adjournment will save about $34,000 of costs.

While the regular session is concluded, we wonder if will be called back into special session yet this year. Yes, we passed a budget that is technically balanced, but based on what some believe, the revenue projections may prove overly optimistic over the next two years in light of continuing stress in the agricultural economy.  The budget adopted draws down our state rainy day fund and we will start the next budget with an uncomfortably low carryover balance from the current budget, leaving almost no margin for error should state tax collections continue to fall short of projections.

Normally, the budget is based upon a 3% reserve, meaning we only authorize spending 97% of the revenues we anticipate being available.  That way, if revenues fall short of predictions, there is a cushion so that we have not committed to spend more than we actually take in.  As I mentioned in a previous column, the budget the Legislature presented to the governor was balanced in part by only providing for a 2.5% reserve.  However, the governor vetoed $55 million of spending, which restores us back to be a more fiscally responsible 3% reserve.

Efforts to override a number of the individual spending items the governor reduced through line-item vetoes were unsuccessful. Important to know is that the line-item veto in each of these programs does not mean providers will receive across-the-board rate reductions. Among these were reductions in amounts authorized in the Department of Health and Human Services.  From the $1.69 billion two-year funding for the Medicaid program, Governor Ricketts vetoed $11.8 million in each of the two fiscal years.  That is about a 1.4% reduction.  The Governor also vetoed $3.23 million each year, or 2.12%, from the $303.7 million the Legislature had authorized for the development disability aid program.  The governor’s vetoes reduced the amount appropriated for behavior health by $1.186 million each year from the total of $146 million passed by the Legislature for the next two years, or about 1.6%.  In child welfare programs, the Legislature authorized spending $333.4 million over two years.  The governor vetoed $640,000 in each of the two fiscal years, or about .38%.

Much misinformation was being circulated by certain associations with lobbyists working the floor, email and social media. Following this upon our contacting the Department of Health and Human Services Director Calder Lynch, we were provided a fact sheet with details of how individuals receiving Medicaid services care will continue to do so. Please note that the Governor, and also senators make protecting ongoing services under these aid programs a priority as working on the budget.  Overall, the reductions to HHS aid programs in this budget amount to little over a one percent decrease.  Other agencies, such as Environmental Quality and Natural Resources among many others, saw much greater reductions in the 6-9 percent range.

Again, important to know is that the line-item veto in each of these programs does not mean providers will receive across-the-board rate reductions. Nor does it mean that critical services will be reduced.   The Medicaid budget is a block appropriation based on forecasted need and the state has the responsibility to manage the program to minimize impact on access to services for Medicaid eligible individuals.  Additionally, this does not impact services not covered by Medicare like long-term and nursing home care, and assisted living services.   Also, none of the vetoes automatically or necessarily translate into available services falling short of needs.  The Department of Health and Human Services will work with stakeholders to protect critical services within the budgeted amounts.  In some cases, the budgets for these programs will benefit from an increase in the federal match rate, which will result in some increase in federal funds offsetting some of the reduction in state appropriations.

Please contact me, or our staff with questions or concerns at (402) 471-2728 or by email at; or stop by Room 1022 if you are in the State Capitol. If you would like to follow the Legislature online please visit Live broadcasting is also available on NET2.


Division of Medicaid and Long-Term Care

The line-item veto of funding in the Medicaid aid budget will not mean providers will receive across-the-board rate reductions.  The Medicaid aid budget is a block appropriation based on forecasted need and Medicaid has the responsibility to manage the program within its appropriation and minimize adverse access-to-service issues for Medicaid eligible individuals and families. For example, Medicaid has identified that Nebraska is an outlier in reimbursing certain hospital and professional services for Medicaid/Medicare dual eligible member services up to the Medicare rate. Capping payments at the Medicaid rate, as 44 states do, would achieve the general savings necessary to meet the requirements of the Governor’s veto. This does not impact services not covered by Medicare like long-term care. Medicaid will work with stakeholders to devise an appropriations reduction strategy that protects critical services like long-term care.

Division of Developmental Disabilities

The line-item veto of funding in the DD aid budget will not mean providers will receive across-the-board rate reductions.  DD has the responsibility to manage the program within its appropriation and minimize adverse access-to-service issues for DD eligible individuals and families. DD will work with stakeholders to devise an appropriations reduction strategy that protects critical services.

Division of Behavioral Health

The line-item veto of funding in the Behavioral Health aid budget will not mean providers will receive across-the-board rate reductions. The amount of funding included in the line-item veto represents 1% of total contracts funds to the Behavioral Health Regions. DBH worked with the Regional Administrators to examine historical utilization and identify reductions in non-core programs like training, special projects, initiatives, and administrative costs.  Historically, behavioral health providers under contract with the Regions have received a 10% increase in rates over the last four years, including a substantial increase in two services through DHHS cost model work.  Those rate increases are sustained in the current budget plan and DBH will work with the Regions on the implementation plan to protect critical services.

Division of Children & Family Services

The line-item veto of funding in the CFS budget will not mean providers or contractors will receive across-the-board rate reductions.  CFS has the responsibility to manage its programs within its appropriation and minimize adverse access-to-service issues for families. CFS has identified efficiencies in how it administers drug testing contracts that will garner savings in excess of the amount included in the line-item veto.

Week nineteen of the first biennium of the 105th Legislature consisted of days 78 through 81 of this 90-day session.

On Monday and Tuesday the Legislature took final action by adopting the state’s biennium budget. This session took place during an exceptionally low revenue growth in our state, primarily caused by a sharp ongoing decline in commodity prices in the agricultural economy. The budget adopted by the Legislature authorizes $8.9 billion of spending over the next two years, averaging about 1% annual growth in state budget expenditures. While this budget slows the rate of growth in state spending, and includes about $700 million of general fund reductions from the initial budget requests by state agencies, other senators and I believe that perhaps we should have made additional budget reductions to prevent the need for a special session later this year.

To balance the budget, the four budget bills call for drawing down the state cash reserve fund and only provides for a 2.5% cash reserve rather than the normal 3% cash reserve. During the final round of debate, the Legislature again debated the same amendment I discussed in my previous column that would have taken the budget back to amounts in the 2016-17 budget and utilized the cash reserve fund to accommodate increases in the salaries of state employees and health care costs. Another amendment, introduced by Senator Albrecht, was debated that would have made a one percent across-the-board reductions to general fund amounts. Since both amendments were withdrawn the Legislature did not have the opportunity to vote on them, but the amendments provided an opportunity to highlight additional needed reductions in state spending. The next step in the process will be for the Governor and his staff to go through the budget passed by the Legislature to determine if they would like to make any line-item vetoes.

On Thursday we debated LB 651, also known as the Nebraska Reading Improvement Act. Due to all the misinformation about this bill, it generated much undue controversy. Contrary to popular belief, this bill would not require a student who has failed a single test at the end of third grade to be retained in third grade regardless of disabilities, a lack of proficiency in English, or many other reasons that might explain why the student is struggling. If a third grader is not reading at third grade level, as demonstrated by a multitude of tests, the bill – with the amendments – would require that retention be seriously considered by the parents (or guardians), teacher, and principal.

Many people have asked why this bill is even necessary? According to the Nebraska Department of Education, 23% of third graders across the state were not meeting Nebraska state assessment (NeSA) standards in 2012. Some improvement was seen in 2016, as that number dropped to 18%. While some schools are continuing to improve because of increased attention on reading beginning in kindergarten, many others are not. In some schools, as many as 70% of third graders are not reading at grade level. There is little evidence that a child who is unable to read at grade level but is allowed to advance from third grade to fourth grade, ever catches up. Sad to say, nearly 90 percent of students who fail to earn a high school diploma struggled with reading in third grade; almost 85% of teenagers in the juvenile justice system are functionally illiterate; seven out of ten adult prisoners cannot read above a fourth-grade level; and high school dropouts make up 90% of Americans on welfare and 75% of food stamp recipients. The ability to read and write well is a very necessary and fundamental skill to function in our lives today, and it is important that we instill reading skills at an early age.  Implementation of LB 651 seeks to chip away at illiteracy and its ill effects, which are borne by all of us.

Please contact me, or our staff with questions or concerns at (402) 471-2728 or by email at; or stop by Room 1022 if you are in the State Capitol. If you would like to follow the Legislature online please visit Live broadcasting is also available on NET2.


May 8, 2017


Senator Brasch invites high school students to apply for youth legislative experience

High school students are invited to take on the role of state senators at the Unicameral Youth Legislature June 11-14.  At the State Capitol, student senators will sponsor bills, conduct committee hearings, and debate legislation. Senator Brasch says, “This is a great opportunity for Nebraska high school students to learn about their state capitol building and experience the legislative process of the nation’s only Unicameral Legislature.”

The Unicameral Youth Legislature gives behind-the-scenes access to students who have an interest in public office, government, politics, law, public policy, debate or public speaking.  Students will learn about the inner workings of the Legislature directly from senators and staff.

Registrants are encouraged to apply for a Greg Adams Civic Scholarship award, which covers the full cost of admission.  Applicants must submit a short essay.  Other $100 scholarships are also available. The deadline for registration is May 15.

The Office of the Clerk of the Nebraska Legislature coordinates the Unicameral Youth Legislature.  The University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s Extension 4-H Youth Development Office coordinates housing and recreational activities as part of the Big Red Summer Camps program.

To learn more about the program, go to or call (402) 471-2788.



Heidi Uhing

Nebraska Legislature

Unicameral Information Office

(402) 471-2788

Week eighteen of the first biennium of the 105th Legislature consisted of days 74 through 77 of this 90-day session.

On Tuesday the Legislature debated and unfortunately did not advance LB 461, the tax reform package introduced in the Revenue Committee by Senator Smith and me at the request of Governor Ricketts. This legislation was a combination of property tax reform for agricultural producers, as well as income and corporate tax relief – tied to revenue triggers – for all working Nebraskans. There was a lot of confusion on the floor of the Legislature about the revenue triggers utilized in the bill. The way the triggers would have worked was by economic forecasting. The Tax Rate Review Committee meets in November and would have examined the expected rate of growth in net General Fund receipts from the current fiscal year to the upcoming fiscal year, as determined by the Nebraska Economic Forecasting Advisory Board, and if the expected rate of growth in receipts is at least 3.5 percent – including the tax relief set to take place – for the upcoming fiscal year, then small incremental tax relief would have been implemented. If the expected growth did not hit the 3.5 percent threshold then the small incremental reductions in taxes would have been deferred until the growth was reached. This legislation is a prudent and safe way to implement tax reductions. Many of the opponents of the bill kept using this year’s budget shortfall as political rhetoric to oppose the bill. However, as I previously explained, the tax relief would be future tax reductions that depend entirely upon the General Fund revenues growing at least 3.5 percent a year, which would include the expected reduction in revenue. So if a bill similar to LB 461 had been passed last year, it would not have made balancing the state’s budget this year any more difficult, since the tax relief would not have been triggered this year.

Each budget bill was advanced to Final Reading last week. Senator Steve Erdman introduced an amendment to the main budget bill, LB 327, which would have kept spending at fiscal year 2016-17 levels except for added increases in salaries for state employees and health insurance packages that have already been negotiated with the unions. I supported that amendment as it would have further restrained spending and would prevent the Legislature from needing to call a special session later in the year, as yet might happen with the further decreases in state revenue expected in 2018. I am concerned that the Legislature is drawing too much money from the cash reserve fund and not cutting spending further, which is why I voted no in advancing the budget bills.

On Thursday the Legislature debated LB 44, also known as the Remote Seller Sales Tax Collection Act. This legislation would have required remoted sellers, which are online sellers with no physical presence in our state, to collect and remit sales tax if their gross revenue in Nebraska exceeded $100,000 or their sales in Nebraska consist of 200 or more separate transactions. I believe we need to wait for pending federal court cases which will be deciding the constitutionality of states’ authority to require the collection and remitting of the online sales tax. I and many other senators did not support this bill, and it failed to receive the necessary 33 votes to overcome a filibuster.

The Legislature also advanced LB 289 to Final Reading last week. I have discussed this important bill in a previous column. In short, it will impose harsher penalties on sex traffickers and on those who solicit victims of sex trafficking. It will also allow victims of sexual assault to terminate the parental rights of their attacker if a child results from the sexual assault.

Please contact me, or our staff with questions or concerns at (402) 471-2728 or by email at; or stop by Room 1022 if you are in the State Capitol. If you would like to follow the Legislature online please visit Live broadcasting is also available on NET2.

Week seventeen of the first biennium of the 105th Legislature consisted of days 70 through 73 of this 90-day session.

On Monday of last week we debated LB 595 at length. This bill allows teachers or administrators to use necessary and reasonable physical force or restraint to subdue a student who becomes physically violent toward himself or herself, another student, a teacher, or an administrator until such student no longer presents a danger. This legislation also allows teachers or administrators to use physical restraint to subdue a student if he or she exhibits destructive behavior toward school property until such student ceases the destructive behavior or the student is removed from the classroom. Furthermore, LB 595 allows a teacher to remove a student from a class if the following criteria are met: the teacher documents that such student repeatedly interferes with other students’ ability to learn; the teacher determines such student’s behavior is so unruly, disruptive, or abusive that it seriously interferes with other students’ ability to learn; and the teacher determines that such student has committed other disruptive acts that merit discipline under the Student Discipline Act. When this bill had a public hearing on February 7th Jay Sears, the Director of Instructional Advocacy for the Nebraska State Education Association, testified as a proponent and said that he has worked at the NSEA for 32 years and never have they received such overwhelming approval from teachers across Nebraska on a bill like they have on this one. He said that the NSEA received over 3,000 responses – in less than three hours – to their teacher survey on LB 595 with the vast majority in support of the bill. He noted that the NSEA has never received 3,000 responses on any issue, let alone in three hours. That tells me that this legislation is necessary and our teachers are signaling, loud and clear, that they need to be able to control their classrooms. I am in favor of this bill, but unfortunately it did not have enough votes (33 is needed) to overcome a filibuster.

On Tuesday and Wednesday we began debating a series of bills that will set the state budget for the next two years. As I mentioned in a previous column, we entered the session facing a large budget shortfall, in large part due to a slowdown in the agricultural economy which led to a reduction in available state revenues to support ongoing commitments. As the Legislature began debate on the budget, the Nebraska Economic Forecasting Board lowered its estimate of revenues the state would collect in this budget cycle by another $55 million, making the task of balancing the budget even more difficult. I applaud both the Governor and the Appropriations Committee for presenting a budget plan that must make necessary reductions to bring state spending commitments back in line with anticipated revenues. So far the Legislature has been willing to hold the line on not imposing new fees or higher taxes. You can review the budget at this webpage:

LB 409 passed its second round of debate on Thursday. This bill was prioritized by the Education Committee as its necessary adjustments to the TEEOSA formula help to balance the state’s budget. The bill reduces the increase that was originally scheduled for TEEOSA; the amount of TEEOSA is still increasing but at a lesser rate. LB 409 increased the local effort rate assumed by the formula, which increases a school district’s resources. This legislation also decreases the amount of Net Option Funding that school districts will receive. I am concerned about these cuts in the TEEOSA formula since they may place a bigger burden on property taxpayers as we work to balance the state’s budget.

On Monday we were happy to welcome the third and fourth graders from St. Paul’s Lutheran School located in Arlington, NE, and on Wednesday we were happy to welcome the fourth graders from Lyons-Decatur Northeast Schools.

Please contact me, or our staff with questions or concerns at (402) 471-2728 or by email at; or stop by Room 1022 if you are in the State Capitol. If you would like to follow the Legislature online please visit Live broadcasting is also available on NET2.

Week sixteen of the first biennium of the 105th Legislature consisted of days 66 through 69 of this 90-day session.

On Friday we began debate on LB 461, our Revenue Committee’s tax package. A significant portion of it is the Agricultural Valuation Fairness Act, LB 338, which I introduced at the request of the Governor. After much discussion and work, LB 461 contains LB 338 as AM 954 and 1095 – as well as many portions of LB 602 sponsored by Senator Steve Erdman – which utilizes an income potential approach for valuation of agricultural and horticultural land. This is an essential part of the complete tax reform package. Moving away from the market approach to an income potential approach will be fairer, more sustainable, and more predictable over the long term in valuing agricultural and horticultural land. LB 461 creates an Agricultural Valuation Fairness Committee that will develop income and expense estimates for all agricultural and horticultural land in Nebraska, as well as capitalization rates necessary to produce uniform and proportionate assessed valuations. LB 461 would also add an additional $30 – $40 million a year to the state aid formula for schools. Three hours of full debate took place and we adjourned for the weekend. LB 461 will return to the floor for the remaining three hours of debate before a vote is taken.

On Tuesday we debated LB 640. There were a lot of moving parts in this bill. First, it split the school districts’ budgets into two components. In one, only 55% of a school’s budget could come from property taxes. The other 45% was again split into two components. In one, 75% of the remaining 45% would come from state aid, and the other 25% of the remaining 45% could come from local property taxes, but only by a two-thirds vote of the local school board. The bill would have also lowered the assumed amount of a school district’s resources, which is used to determine how much state aid school districts receive via the TEEOSA formula. The bill also lowered the maximum levy rate for school districts from 1.05 to 1.00. The intent of this bill was to equalize a grossly unequal method of funding schools via state dollars. If LB 640 is passed, most property taxpayers in Nebraska would see their property tax burden significantly decrease, especially those in the unequalized districts. However, no action was taken on this bill as it did not have the 33 votes necessary to break a filibuster. The Legislature may debate it again in the future if a compromise can be reached. I support this bill.

We also debated LB 661. This bill protects the identity of any person or entity that manufactures or supplies compounds, medical supplies, or equipment, or prescribes the substance or substances utilized to carry out an execution. This is a necessary step in helping to ensure that capital punishment can and will be used in Nebraska. Senator Kuehn, who introduced the bill, persuasively made the point during floor debate that the reason a measure like this has become necessary is because extreme anti-death penalty activists harass, intimidate, and bully drug manufacturers and others involved in assisting the state in carrying out justice. Last November, the citizens of Nebraska had a chance to show the Legislature where they stood on the death penalty when they voted at the polls. The citizens of Nebraska showed – by an overwhelming majority – they want to keep the death penalty. It is now up to the Legislature to ensure that the death penalty can be utilized. Three hours of debate did not result in a vote, but it will return for a vote with three more hours of debate remaining. I will vote in favor of this bill.

Please contact me, or our staff with questions or concerns at (402) 471-2728 or by email at; or stop by Room 1022 if you are in the State Capitol. If you would like to follow the Legislature online please visit Live broadcasting is also available on NET2.

Week fifteen of the first biennium of the 105th Legislature consisted of days 62 through 65 of this 90-day session.

On Friday, April 21st – day 69 – LB 461 is scheduled to be on General File. This is the first time the full Legislature will debate and possibly vote on the tax proposal bill from the Revenue Committee. My column last week described this bill at length and the great importance of moving it forward. In a state where one in every four jobs is tied to agriculture, lowing valuations of agricultural land is key to growing our economy. Statewide needs and inequity in funding and taxes must be addressed, and LB 338, my agricultural valuation bill that was amended into LB 461, would help to address the inequity.

Budget discussions are likely to dominate much of the remainder of the legislative session.  According to legislative rules, the Appropriations Committee is required to report its budget recommendations to the Legislature no later than April 24th this year. I am anticipating that the budget recommendations will be presented this week, and that we will begin budget debates during the final week of April.  Our budget discussions are shaping up to be some of the most contentious we have faced in recent times. A preliminary budget projection prepared by the Appropriations Committee earlier this session indicates that we started the session with a budget shortfall of $134 million. The fiscal status deteriorated even further when projections of state revenues over the next two years were revised downward in February.  That revenue forecast added another $153 million to the imbalance. The Nebraska Economic Forecasting Board will provide a final revenue projection before the end of the month, and it is possible that the revenue projection that we will base the budget on will be revised downward again.

It will be a difficult discussion, since to balance the budget it will be necessary to make actual cuts in general fund commitments to many ongoing programs while still meeting obligations in corrections, school funding, and other areas.  I am also committed to leaving room in the budget for achieving much needed reform of the method of valuing agricultural land for property tax purposes. We do have the option of utilizing some of the state’s “rainy day fund” to help us balance the budget in the short term, but we will not be able to achieve long-term budget stability without reducing the state’s budget commitments and a return to more normal revenue growth in the years ahead.

Last week the Legislature debated LB 44, which would require online retailers to collect and remit sales taxes for purchases made by Nebraskans over the internet.  As online shopping grows in popularity, it is impacting state and local sales tax revenues as well as being unfair to retail businesses located in the state.  While the concept of asking online retailers to collect sales tax is appealing, and by some estimates could result in $30 – $40 million additional state revenues annually, there are many problems surrounding LB 44.

During floor discussion it was noted that, even if passed, LB 44 would likely be challenged and enjoined and therefore would not help us with our budget situation for the foreseeable future. A 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision barred states from requiring out-of-state businesses to remit sales taxes if that business lacked a substantial nexus with that state. That decision has not stopped states from continuing to pass legislation requiring out-of-state businesses to remit online sales taxes. The best solution would be for Congress to intervene, and there are bills in Congress to allow and assist states in collecting online sales tax.

Please contact me, my administrative aide, Courtney McClellen; my legislative aide, Brett Waite; or Rick Leonard, the Research Analyst with questions or concerns at (402) 471-2728 or by email at; or stop by Room 1022 (please note we have changed office location, two doors south of  previous office) if you are in the State Capitol. If you would like to follow the Legislature online you can visit Live broadcasting is also available on NET2.

Sen. Lydia Brasch

District 16
Room #1022
P.O. Box 94604
Lincoln, NE 68509
Phone: (402) 471-2728
Search Senator Page For:
Committee Assignments
Search Current Bills
Search Laws
Live Video Streaming
Find Your Senator