Nebraska
Partisan fight continues over committee assignments in Nebraska Legislature • Nebraska Examiner
LINCOLN — The fate of some conservative priorities, such as changing how Nebraska allocates its votes for president or adding a “women’s bill of rights” to state law, could depend on whether Republicans succeed this week in making Democrats a minority on every legislative committee but one.
The leading point of contention Wednesday revolved around the makeup of the eight-member Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee. By the end of the first day of the session, Government was set to have five Democrats and three Republicans, including its chair.
The group deciding is the Legislature’s 13-member Committee on Committees, which includes a chair and four representatives each from three legislative “caucuses,” which roughly mirror the state’s three congressional districts to reflect statewide representation.
“Me personally, and I’m one vote, I’m not representing any caucus in this,” State Sen. Christy Armendariz of Omaha, the Committee on Committees chair, said. “I think that the committee assignments should be representative of the makeup of the entire state.”
‘They’ve chosen their party’
While the Legislature is officially nonpartisan, Armendariz, a first-time member of the committee, said all 13 members know what is going on: a fight over partisan balance, which impacts all Nebraskans.
The Committee on Committees consists of eight Republicans, four Democrats and one nonpartisan independent. There are 33 Republicans in the Legislature, 15 Democrats and one nonpartisan progressive.
“They’ve chosen their party,” Armendariz said of Nebraska voters. “I don’t think it’s fair to exclude anybody in the state from representation on the committee.”
First day of 2025 Nebraska Legislature underscores conservative stronghold
The Committee on Committees met after Republicans in the Legislature swept leadership positions for all but one committee. They left the Urban Affairs Committee in the hands of State Sen. Terrell McKinney of Omaha, a Democrat who chaired the committee the past two years.
Under a set of unofficial, tentative placements discussed Wednesday evening, Republicans would maintain membership leads on all but the Government Committee and Urban Affairs Committee, which would still become more conservative.
Conservatives would grow their numbers on the previously deadlocked Judiciary Committee as well as on the Business and Labor, Health and Human Services and Natural Resources Committees.
All other daily committees will be led by Republicans, as will the Rules Committee and Executive Board.
‘This was a fantasy’
Wednesday’s Committee on Committees meeting began with representatives from the 1st and 3rd Congressional Districts having already penciled in where the members of their caucuses should be placed on each of the daily committees. Those caucus representatives filled in names of where senators from the 2nd Congressional District might fall, which they defended as merely “placeholders.”
The 2nd District Caucus, which is led by three Democrats and one independent, immediately rejected that suggestion and said the other caucuses had overstepped.
State Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha, the progressive independent who has served on the Committee on Committees before, described the behavior as unprecedented.
“This was a fantasy for y’all, but that’s not the reality that we were ever going to be working in,” she said.
State Sen. Mike Jacobson of North Platte responded: “We understand that. I think we just, truly, we’re just trying to figure out what we can live with, in terms of how we want to end up.”
Hunt told Republicans on the committee to ask themselves, “Have you won enough?” The question came after the 2nd District Caucus agreed to swap freshman Omaha State Sens. Dunixi Guereca, a Democrat, and Bob Andersen, a Republican, on the Government Committee.
If accepted, the committee then would be evenly split between progressives and conservatives, 4-4, which State Sen. Rita Sanders of Bellevue, the newly elected chair, said would be better. She did not return a call after the meeting requesting further comment.
A line in the sand
Other conservatives drew lines in the sand seeking to shift the Government Committee to leaning Republican 5-3, as they had in the framework put forward by senators from the 1st and 3rd District Caucuses.
Bills stuck in a deadlocked committee can still be moved to the full Legislature with 25 votes. If the Government Committee stayed 5-3 for Democrats, and the majority killed a bill they didn’t like, the introducer could still advance the bill to the floor with 30 votes from the full Legislature.
Such bills would likely be filibustered, meaning they would need 33 votes to pass, anyway.
“I don’t see any losers on this sheet,” Hunt said of the initial committee assignments. “If you take the Government [Committee] deal — I know you want a majority, that’s what this is about, but we’re not going to get there. And I don’t think that’s a loss.”
Hunt and the 2nd District Caucus moved to advance the report with the 4-4 Government Committee. The motion failed 7-6.
Sanders voted with the 2nd District Caucus and Democratic State Sen. Eliot Bostar of Lincoln to accept the evenly balanced committee and advance the amended report.
‘An attack on the nonpartisan Unicameral’
Part of the contention comes two days after the 2nd District Caucus met in Omaha and progressives secured all four spots on the Committee on Committees, as well as two coveted spots on the Executive Board, which manages the day-to-day operations of the legislative branch. (The full 2nd District Caucus consists of eight Democrats, eight Republicans and one progressive independent.)
That meant kicking off Republican State Sens. Brad von Gillern of Omaha from the Committee on Committees and Merv Riepe of Ralston from the Executive Board.
Von Gillern called the move “the most intentionally partisan thing I’ve experienced since I was sworn in two years ago” and “an attack on the nonpartisan Unicameral Legislature by those who typically wave that flag harder than anyone else.”
He said the decision doesn’t set a “constructive tone” ahead of conversations like winner-take-all when progressives make “such a partisan act.”
“Votes on important issues often fall on party line, but this was not issue-driven and did nothing to improve their vote count on the overall Committee on Committees,” von Gillern said in a text. “There will still be a Republican majority there. There is no discernible strategy that I can see.”
State Sen. John Fredrickson of Omaha, who got a spot on both the Executive Board and Committee on Committees, said: “That’s where the votes landed.”
A cautionary tale
At one point, Jacobson suggested that a path forward might include the 2nd District senators accepting the pre-slated committee assignments from the 1st and 3rd District Caucuses.
Clerk of the Legislature Brandon Metzler cautioned that if the committee chose to cross that threshold, “you’re not coming back.”
“I think that’s dangerous for not only CD 2, but I think it’s dangerous for CD 3, from an urban-rural split,” Metzler said. “The caucus system is inherently political. We have never had a choice made for a caucus that they were not, as a caucus, on board with. But that’s the determination of this committee to decide.”
Factors in committee assignments
State Sen. Mike Moser of Columbus said there are multiple factors to crafting committee assignments, such as:
- Incumbency — Not kicking senators off of committees they most recently served on.
- Senator preference — Lawmakers typically provide first and second choice for assignments.
- Caucus balance — The Committee on Committees usually weighs this by giving each caucus a set number of seats on a committee, based on who the chair is and proceeding through the caucuses in order after (such as 1-2-3).
Moser said there is another important consideration: partisan balance.
Hunt asked him: “Should all committees be 2:1, Republican to Democrat?”
“That’s what the average of — since there’s 66% Republicans and 33% Democrats — that’s about what it should reflect on all the committees,” Moser responded.
A path forward?
Lawmakers said if the Omaha-area lawmakers wouldn’t budge, they could find other solutions, which Jacobson and Moser said would require more deliberation.
“If the Second District is locked in where they’re at, then there may be some actions in response that other caucuses make,” Moser said. “Maybe they’re not going to be pleasant, but we’re going to think about that overnight, talk about it a little bit and come back tomorrow.”
Asked whether that meant some 1st or 3rd District Caucus members might lose committee positions they previously held, or not get their top preferences, Armendariz said that’s up to the districts.
“They get to make their own decisions,” Armendariz said. “I would never want to get in the middle of that, if that’s what they choose to do.”
Committee assignments will ultimately be kicked out to the full Legislature in a preliminary report. The Legislature would then vote to accept, or reject, the placements after the Committee on Committees advances a final report.
However, preliminary reports often become final committee placements.
The Committee on Committees reconvenes shortly after 10 a.m. on Thursday.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
Nebraska softball finalized its coaching staff on Wednesday. Head coach Rhonda Revelle signed an extension that runs through the 2031 season. The program also finalized several previously announced coaching changes.
Revelle earned the extension after leading Nebraska to one of its best seasons in history, bringing the team back to the Women’s College World Series for the first time since 2013. The Huskers totaled a school-record 52 wins in Revelle’s 34th season as Nebraska’s head coach, helping solidify her as the winningest coach in Nebraska athletics history.
“As we said when we had the privilege of naming the field at Bowlin Stadium in her honor, Rhonda Revelle is Nebraska Softball. Rhonda is not only a great leader of our softball program, but she is a world-class individual who elevates our entire athletic department in many ways. The trajectory of our program is at an all-time high coming off a record-breaking season and we are excited for the years ahead under the leadership of Rhonda and her outstanding staff.”
Revelle also re-worked the responsibilities of her coaching staff, elevating existing staff members and bringing in a slew of former players as assistants. This comes following the retirement of long-time assistant Lori Sippel in June.
Diane Miller has been elevated to associate head coach, and Mandie Nocita was promoted to assistant coach. Olivia Ferrell and Jordy Frahm also join the staff and will serve as assistant coaches. Hannah Coor and Hannah Camenzind have been added as graduate assistants. Lauren Camenzind will be a graduate manager for the Huskers.
Contact/Follow us @CornhuskersWire on X (formerly Twitter) and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Nebraska news, notes and opinions.
Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen on Wednesday announced measures to further cut state spending, including a cut in state agency spending and a hiring freeze on most positions.
Pillen said in a news release that the measures are necessary after the state paid out $307 million more in state tax refunds than anticipated in fiscal year 2026, which ended June 30. Tax receipts have come in below projections in March, April and May, leading to a current expected deficit of $172 million.
That’s after lawmakers closed a $646 million budget hole in their most recent legislative session.
The governor has previously sought to cut spending to provide more property tax relief to Nebraska residents and had called for additional cuts during the current fiscal year.
“I am pleased with the progress we have made, but I’m not satisfied,” Pillen said in a news release.
Accompanying the release was a memo Pillen sent to state agencies, boards and commissions in which he called on them to “exercise additional fiscal restraint.”
Among the measures outlined in the memo:
- A freeze on creating any new positions or filling any vacancies without approval from the state budget office. The freeze does not apply to law enforcement or corrections positions.
- A 5% reduction in budgets for all state agencies.
- All agencies, boards and commissions must provide monthly cash flow projections.
- Agency leaders are directed to “concentrate” on eliminating redundant processes, services regulation and aid programs.
- Agency leaders are directed to reduce their agencies’ physical footprint and “consolidate teams and services.”
All state entities are required to submit their plans for reducing spending by the end of the month.
The memo also said agencies should “prepare for downward adjustments to appropriations” not only in the current fiscal year but also in the 2028 and 2029 fiscal years.
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear Nebraska’s lawsuit against Colorado over a proposed canal that would take water out of the South Platte River in Colorado and send it to a reservoir in Nebraska.
Nebraska claims Colorado is deliberately obstructing efforts to build the ditch, known as the Perkins Canal, even though everyone agrees Nebraska has the right to do so. The canal is necessary, Nebraska says, because Colorado isn’t sending enough water into Nebraska.
The Perkins Canal would divert water from the South Platte River near Ovid to a storage site somewhere in Nebraska. The South Platte River Compact, ratified by both states and Congress in 1923, requires Colorado to guarantee a flow in the river of 120 cubic feet per second at a water gauge near the state line during the irrigation season. The compact also authorizes Nebraska to build the canal and grants the right to use the power of eminent domain to acquire land on which to build it. Initial work was done on the canal more than a century ago, but the project was abandoned as unfeasible.
Nebraska resurrected the idea in late 2021, citing fears that urban development along Colorado’s Interstate 25 corridor and plans to expand water storage were causing Colorado to violate the terms of the 1923 compact.
The idea that Nebraska might actually build the canal has water users in the lower reaches of the river worried that doing so would disrupt the water augmentation process that underpins much of the crop irrigation along the South Platte, especially between Fort Morgan and the Colorado-Nebraska state line. It is designed to help Colorado meet the terms of the 1923 compact.
Colorado land owners have resisted Nebraska’s efforts to buy land in the Julesburg area so the canal can be built. Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser and Gov. Jared Polis, while recognizing Nebraska’s right to build the canal, have nevertheless sworn to do all they can to protect Coloradans’ property and water rights. Seeing such rhetoric as subverting Nebraska’s right to build, Nebraska sued Colorado in the Supreme Court in July 2025, alleging that Colorado is obstructing Nebraska’s efforts to go ahead with the Perkins project. Nebraska also attacked Colorado’s water augmentation system, saying it doesn’t work.
To understand augmentation, it’s important to know that Colorado operates on the prior appropriation doctrine, meaning the oldest (senior) water right holders get their water first. During dry periods, senior users may place a “call” on a stream, forcing junior users to stop taking water to ensure the senior rights are fulfilled. When someone pumps water out of a river basin, it eventually pulls water out of nearby streams and rivers, which can illegally shortchange senior surface-right holders. In that case, the junior wells would have to be shut down until senior rights were satisfied
To avoid such shutdowns, called “curtailment,” Colorado devised a system called augmentation in which the water that is pumped during the irrigation season must be replaced during the winter months so it flows back through the aquifer into the river in the following irrigation season. Some augmentation is done simply by buying water rights from upstream users, increasing the amount of water in the river. The system is highly complex and requires detailed accounting of river flows.
In a prepared statement issued last week, after the high court agreed to hear the case, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser said Colorado is in compliance with the compact.
The court’s decision, he wrote, “merely opens the door for Nebraska to bring its claims against Colorado. Nebraska’s burden to prove those claims is incredibly high and we will vigorously defend Colorado’s full entitlements under the compact.”
Perkins Canal needed because Colorado is harming Nebraska
But Nebraska officials insist water augmentation isn’t doing what it was supposed to do. In its 55-page complaint to the U.S. Supreme Court, Nebraska calls the augmentation system illegal and a violation of the river compact.
“Colorado’s water administration system, including its augmentation plans, have harmed and will continue to harm Nebraska,” the lawsuit reads. “For example, many augmentation projects … allow junior well owners to pump water out of priority during the irrigation season, provided they pump or divert additional water during the non-irrigation season and apply it to recharge ponds. This method assumes that water will percolate back into the water table and make its way to the South Platte River in time to make whole downstream senior users.”
Kent Miller is general manager of the Twin Platte Natural Resources District, which includes most of the South Platte River in Nebraska. He’s said he’s watched the river since 1972 and is skeptical that augmentation even works.
“Those plans have not been working, and I base that on the fact that the Western Irrigation District rarely receives what it’s supposed to receive,” Miller said.
In May, U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer filed an amicus brief with the high court recommending that the court allow the suit to go ahead, but with conditions.
In its lawsuit, Nebraska addresses augmentation because of its complexity and insists that any mechanism Colorado uses to comply with the compact should be simple. In his amicus brief, Sauer recommended tossing the argument.
“Nebraska reads Article VIII (of the compact) as mandating that compliance mechanisms be ‘simple,’ and it alleges that Colorado has violated that requirement,” Sauer wrote. “But Article VIII imposes no such requirement; it merely authorizes Colorado officials to enforce the Compact without action by the Colorado legislature. Because Nebraska’s Article VIII claim is facially meritless, it should not be permitted to proceed further.”
Sauer further recommended disallowing arguments that Colorado is obstructing Nebraska’s efforts to build the canal, saying Nebraska offers no evidence of such obstruction.
In signaling its acceptance of the lawsuit on Monday, the Supreme Court said it wants to hear all of Nebraska’s complaints and let the justices judge for themselves whether parts of it lack merit. Colorado originally had 30 days to respond to the court’s action but, on July 2, requested a 60-day extension.
-
Tennessee3 minutes agoTennessee State men’s hockey cancels 2026-27 inaugural season for second straight year
-
Texas8 minutes agoTed Cruz warns Talarico has ‘real chance’ to flip Texas’ U.S. Senate seat
-
Utah15 minutes agoMan suspected in 2006 Utah murder left suicide note in Las Vegas jail cell: police
-
Vermont18 minutes agoOUTDOOR ACCESS FOR DISABLED IN VERMONT
-
Virginia23 minutes ago4 indicted in Virginia double homicide; second victim ID’d as grandmother of 6
-
Washington30 minutes agoWashington Commanders are retiring Hall of Famer John Riggins’ No. 44
-
Wisconsin33 minutes agoWisconsin State Patrol rides with truck and bus drivers to spot violations in five areas
-
West Virginia38 minutes agoWest Virginia town fires entire police force after chief resigns, sergeant alleges evidence room break-in
