With only 13 legislative days remaining in their 2014 regular session, Nebraska’s 49 legislators are putting in longer hours on the floor of the George W. Norris Chamber at the State Capitol. Sessions that last into the night-time darkness have begun and are likely to be the routine for a majority of the remaining work days.
Some heavy-weight issues are still to be decided before sine die adjournment April 17, including corrections reforms, which stem in part from overcrowded conditions in the state’s prison system; a complex proposal to cover a gap in access to health care using the Medicaid-expansion provisions of the federal Affordable Care Act; water, tax and education policy issues, and final decisions about state spending for the remainder of the current biennium.
Last year, this Legislature adopted a state budget for the two fiscal years running July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014 (FY 2014) and July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015 (FY 2015). This year, the focus is on adjustments to that budget and new spending caused by new enactments.
At the first round of consideration by the Legislature as a whole, the budget adjustments recommended by the nine-member Appropriations Committee won overwhelming approval: the committee’s amendment to the mid-biennium budget bill—LB 905—was approved on a 34-0 vote and the bill advanced as amended to the second stage of floor discussion on a 37-2 vote. Additional amendments were considered likely during further deliberations.
The state’s fiscal condition is better now than it was when the Legislature adjourned its 2013 session early last June. Both actual receipts and projected revenues have increased. As a result, the variance from the minimum cash reserve has moved from a surplus of only about $1 million last June to a surplus now estimated to be $91.5 million.
The Appropriations Committee leads the way in deciding how much more to spend and how much to retain in the cash reserve fund.
The committee’s LB-905 adjustments for the biennium result in a net increase of General Fund appropriations of just $27,739. That net result takes into account deficits and recommended new spending, but also lapses of unexpended appropriations from prior years. Nevertheless, according to the committee’s narrative, “[T]he more significant net impact over the two years in $71 million of transfers from the General Fund to other Funds.”
For the remainder of the session, the “green sheet” will be a key budget document. It is an attachment to the daily agenda. Among many numbers, it updates the amount of the unobligated balance. This advises legislators and lobbyists about “A” bills, appropriations, as applicable, for proposed law and policy changes moving towards enactment.
This is also the time of the session when bills en route to passage become vehicles for other legislation not so well placed.
The state constitution prohibits legislative bills from having more than one subject, so amendments have to be germane to the underlying bill. Nonetheless, the “germaneness rule” typically receives a liberal interpretation. If neither the vehicle nor the add-on is controversial, the likelihood of either a procedural challenge or a constitutional challenge is slim.
A simple example of one bill taking on another is LB 359. It pertains to the child-care-subsidy program, proposing to allow a 10 percent disregard of household income at the time of eligibility redeterminations following 12 months of continuous eligibility. At the time of second-round floor action on LB 359, the provisions of LB 732 were added to it via an amendment.
For purposes of the child-care-subsidy program, and the food stamp program as well, LB 732 proposes to disregard certain assets—educational savings accounts, qualified tuition-assistance, or a similar plan established to save for qualified high-education expenses—and certain income—post-secondary scholarships or grants and post-secondary work-study programs—for purposes of eligibility determinations.
LB 359, as amended with LB 732, was pending on Final Reading as this week began.
A more substantive and complex example of one bill taking on another is LB 853. That bill itself proposes clarifications and improvements in a year-old program that assists the transition to adulthood for young people who have been wards of the State Department of Health and Human Services. For one thing it would aptly rename the program from the Young Adult Voluntary Services and Support Act to the Young Adult Bridge to Independence Act.
During the first round of floor action, General File, on a vote of 33-0, lawmakers added a 42-page amendment constituting the provisions of LB 503, the Child Protection and Family Safety Act. It proposes a pilot program, in up to five locations, of “alternative response” by DHHS to reports of child abuse or neglect.
Intake would trigger a comprehensive assessment of child safety, risk of future abuse or neglect, family strengths and needs, and provision of or referral for necessary services. If it is determined that the child is safe, the case would not be entered into the central registry of abuse and neglect cases and participation in services would be voluntary for the family.
LB 853, as amended with LB 503, awaited Select File consideration as the week began.
An interesting twist on this latter example is that while the carrier, LB 853, came through the Legislature’s Health and Human Services Committee, the add-on, LB 503, started out in the Judiciary Committee.
