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 email@example.com
Legislative Update – March 20, 2017
Senator Roy Baker – District 30
In past newsletters, I have spoken about a conservative block of senators who wanted to control much of the session and one way would be through the rules by altering the cloture motion rule. After thirty legislative days with no compromise on the rules, the legislature imposed a temporary moratorium on the rules until Day 50, Monday, March 20. During the stay on the rules debate, the legislature began to work as it was meant to: bills were debated, bills were amended and bills were advanced, many on a non-partisan basis. On Friday, March 17, Speaker Jim Scheer stood on the floor and praised senators for this work. With no rules resolution, the Speaker asked all senators who had amendments on the rules to withdraw their amendments and vote on the rules as they occurred on January 4th, 2017. One by one, the Speaker called on each senator who had amendments on the rules and asked if he would withdraw his amendments. Each one agreed. The Legislature, on Day 49, over half way through the legislative session, adopted permanent rules.
Committees are getting close to the end of public hearings on bills and have been working in Executive Sessions to discuss bills already heard and take action including advancement, amendments, holding or killing bills. I have had a few bills in hearings where I would like to work with groups over the summer to reach a compromise. LB 474 enables beneficiaries to synchronize their medications so they could order and receive them on the same day each month, instead of having to make multiple visits to the pharmacy. This would reduce medication waste, as well as the poor healthcare outcomes that result from decreased medication adherence. The insurance industry raised concerns about the breadth of the bill without having some precautions written into the bill. I agreed to work with all interested parties during the interim.
On March 15, Senator Anna Wishart presented LB 622, the Medical Cannabis Act. The bill describes and defines the regulation of production, processing, dispensing, and qualifications for associated care givers. Places where medical cannabis can be administered are delineated, as well as places where it may not, e.g., schools, correctional facilities, and public places.
Approved forms of medical cannabis are restricted to the following forms: liquid, pills or capsules; vaporized liquid or oil, topical creams and lotions, and suppositories. Smoking would not be an approved method of delivery.
Proponents and opponents testified for more than three hours. Proponents testifying described their personal circumstances, or those of a child or other loved one, that lead them to believe medical cannabis would provide relief when no other mediation has been effective.
Testifiers talked about severe epilepsy, severe chronic pain, severe vomiting, opioid addiction, PTSD, and other diseases. The opponents were law enforcement representatives and the Department of Health and Human Services. The Judiciary Committee advanced the bill to General File and Senator Wishart has made it her priority bill.
However, LB 622 carries a significant fiscal note; there would be $963,603 of state general funds needed in 2017-18 and $873,441 in 2018-19. Given the state’s serious revenue shortfall, the passage of LB 622 appears to have an uphill battle.
In my last update I spoke about LB 666. The Judiciary Committee did advance the bill to General File and I voted in favor. To clarify, the bill applies to any person who stores and transports a firearm.
I welcome and continue to receive your messages about property tax, which is of course, an overriding concern in District 30 as well as across the state. This issue will be addressed by bills coming out of the Revenue and Appropriations Committees. With the vast number of bills addressing taxes, it makes sense to wait to discuss those in detail when we know exactly which options will be brought before the full Legislature.
Your comments about Daylight Saving Time are much appreciated. At this point, sentiment runs roughly two-thirds for staying on one time all year round; about a third of people responding like having DST.
Full days of debate begin next week, so please continue to contact me as we being the last half of the session. firstname.lastname@example.org 502-471-2620