[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6262686,"mediaKeyId","3111934-1cec13eaebe11a43c5992b60ed8dcb89","parentId",3111934,"title","Votes at a glance: confirmations, amendments and bill advancements — Nebraska Legislature, April 22, 2025","audioSeconds",1083,"startMs",917000,"endMs",2000000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3111934-1cec13eaebe11a43c5992b60ed8dcb89&start=917&end=2000","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3111934-1cec13eaebe11a43c5992b60ed8dcb89/thumbnail_917000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6262686/Nebraska/Votes-at-a-glance-confirmations-amendments-and-bill-advancements-Nebraska-Legislature-April-22-2025","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6262686-848c6cbdd9d219f0700cc3ac1b5bf60b/orig.mp4?Expires=1773726132&Signature=QOoylIgJOPEniOxTZZYvet8bslXnM6~rhE892QIosR1cIgU-CMliGw89bGBzFFCz3pswCi0VPhi~-cPLYqBt12WLgpesb23rNEknBLVEf-AkWH1g1AYE2VCYvs9W6ZAOSg-ZkBjejwMnzzBDzSdAMlrKeHKgGKJ5dcR7RQCZH2Z4TFsZ2WfI6dFJZId1WdK7JF4wSqGXlmOBOiCDTeoH2Bq2hXISSuMYJ4GItmVj9oxQncdXfXx3ggLHzQe-VsZVg~RDOXKtX0-SdNBhYxntt~3A1s0JbCAerZ8PfLQKqW3HwgIIH9PBLg-SZ7jVBu80bXSG6neKkmTg2I7LWuQmmQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Nebraska Legislature","date","2025-04-23T00:00:00Z","article","The following floor actions were recorded during the April 22, 2025 floor session of the Nebraska Legislature (George W. Norris chamber). This roundup lists the item, the formal action and the recorded vote where provided in the transcript.

- Transportation & Telecommunications confirmation report (Kyle Anderson and Nathan Sorbon to the State Board of Public Roads Classifications & Standards): committee report adopted on the floor (31 ayes, 0 nays). Source: transportation and telecommunications report and roll call.

- Education committee confirmation (Duane Keim reappointment to the Board of Educational Lands and Funds): committee report adopted on the floor (33 ayes, 0 nays). Source: education committee report and roll call.

- LB613A (appropriation to implement LB613, local-option sales/use tax transparency): advancement to Enrollment & Review — recorded as 30 ayes, 0 nays on the floor. Sponsor: Senator Anderson.

- AM 9 31 to LB78A (technical continuity correction): adopted (29 ayes, 0 nays as recorded on the adoption vote). AM 9 31 corrected a duplicated fund name in the bill language.

- LB78A, LB177A, LB230A, LB230A and other bills were moved forward under routine motions for advancement to Enrollment and Review (text does not include a roll call for every advance). Where the transcript did not record a roll-call tally, the vote result is recorded as \"advance — vote not specified in transcript.\" (Examples: LB78A advanced to E&R for engrossing; LB177A advanced to E&R.)

- LB287 (see separate article): returned to select file, AM1000 adopted, advanced (see detailed item).

Additional notes
- The transcript records a number of routine E&R (engrossing and review) motions that carried by voice vote or unrecorded assent; where the machine or roll-call vote was recorded in the transcript we list the tally above. Items with no tally in the transcript are described as \"vote not specified\" rather than inventing numbers.

Ending note
This list captures the floor actions recorded in the provided transcript. For items that advanced without recorded roll-call tallies on the floor, clerk or committee records should be consulted for the formal vote text and any subsequent engrossment activity.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Legislative Morning Session 4/23/2025","oneSentenceSummary","A compact list of recorded floor actions from the day's session: confirmations, adoption votes on amendments, and advancement votes for bills placed on general/select files.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature NE, Nebraska","taxId",77675,"location","Nebraska","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6262690,"Bracket motion filed as senators debate online sports gambling and youth risk",0,9001000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3111934-1cec13eaebe11a43c5992b60ed8dcb89&start=9001&end=9001","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3111934-1cec13eaebe11a43c5992b60ed8dcb89/thumbnail_9001000.jpg","/articles/6262690/Nebraska/Bracket-motion-filed-as-senators-debate-online-sports-gambling-and-youth-risk","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6262690-1c6888460577affe5f454f0b04fbde33/orig.mp4?Expires=1773726132&Signature=M653LO1mRBsoOo4YzPUgyNqaQ8nA-uGXjh-JsImFlvXmdYgHkfS9l0BYqArfilwyog4O0nWvQyWUOfD8imZmTiENzMr14Zl3Bm3HYNXxpTGxQXuVq~sDumsZKOM5NfWAt47~gv28zwziqF8BSa-5uD8Y2Ox45d3JLHEiFg1FLp7BJaa6y9Maz1NrJUKMJWgTehCt4hKx~q069KT1mSMy4ohaJQeforMtpXe-bycAC4tRgO9ag0PW2VV0xUbWkpVmpRGY1NaM1FBeooc8cUHg4TqDstJCyM5ER3tXe4AHtd1frNEVCcHu-29ZOHfzQI5wfzphaQfKs8pjtSbOjj2MwQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senator Von Gillen offered a bracket motion in opposition to LR20CA, the resolution to authorize online sports gambling; he said he planned a filibuster and urged colleagues to consider social and family harms before legalizing mobile sports betting. The transcript records sustained floor debate from multiple senators but does not show a final disposition of the bracket motion within the recorded session.

Why it mattered: LR20CA would permit online/mobile sports wagering statewide and supporters point to tax revenue potential; opponents warned of addiction, increased financial distress and harms to youth, and argued long-term social costs will outweigh short-term gains. Several speakers cited studies and national reporting to argue online markets disproportionately affect men ages 18–44 and accelerate problem gambling.

What senators said
Senator Von Gillen said online betting makes gambling constant and predatory, marketed especially to young men, and promised the floor would hear extensive evidence including academic and media reports. \"What is the cost are you willing to pay?\" he asked, saying the convenience of mobile apps would draw people into repeated betting on in-game events and prop bets.

Several senators joined the opposition on public-health and fiscal grounds. Senator Holcroft read a letter signed by former Governor Kay Orr and others warning of addiction increases and the potential cannibalization of Main Street businesses, and cited the National Council on Problem Gambling's reports of rising help-line usage. Senator Clements and others cited studies and advocates who described online betting as predatory, citing data showing credit score deterioration and increased debt collection in states with mobile betting.

Supporters of legalizing or studying revenue potential were not dominant in the recorded segment; the floor debate in the transcript centered on the bracket motion and social-cost arguments. Senator Von Gillen said he would filibuster for several hours and offered handouts and a fuller factual record for colleagues to review.

Outcome and next steps
The transcript records the bracket motion, extended debate and multiple statements for and against, but a final vote on Senator Von Gillen's bracket motion was not recorded in the provided transcript. Senators signaled intent to continue the debate and to rely on the fuller record and handouts the sponsor distributed to colleagues.

Ending note
Floor discussion made clear the policy trade-offs at stake: projected tax revenues and property-tax relief advocated by some proponents versus long-term social and financial costs described by opponents and public-health advocates. The record shows the issue will remain contested and likely return to the floor for further debate and possible votes.","Senator Von Gillen moved to bracket LR20CA (a constitutional amendment to authorize online sports betting) and announced an extended filibuster; floor debate focused on addiction risks for young men, social costs, and revenue claims, with no final vote recorded in the transcript.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6262694,"Legislature returns LB287 to correct drafting errors, adopts amendment addressing Omaha Housing Authority issues and SID language",1584,2271000,3855000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3111934-1cec13eaebe11a43c5992b60ed8dcb89&start=2271&end=3855","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3111934-1cec13eaebe11a43c5992b60ed8dcb89/thumbnail_2271000.jpg","/articles/6262694/Nebraska/Legislature-returns-LB287-to-correct-drafting-errors-adopts-amendment-addressing-Omaha-Housing-Authority-issues-and-SID-language","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6262694-dc328229a463f9a5154a2b898330bcd9/orig.mp4?Expires=1773726132&Signature=GSrNYYodMRxDOLzgR7A95yFsPYsWBjW-rEvqicQj7QUBhKkEmhvUPoA8LasdnbjXBhA0wWzXZvBq001mS~aSD4U18u2zsBsPyIuCPHPe5cJ-zKii2tOSUTM8DU5QnQcKJHXEuk3PUMhuOjwceAmMl8B759EP~pXJNy6aRfvV03pjyc-Zx0ygMZwv36E6HZXcNacihpMLwuc2ZJnpYbPDmfw8SOY8-~zqGFiPODNvqlcUQDooMXAVKSxu~I7DpeeTZQKvfyYpmkNcxvqqIr7lXjXCz1R-u6Vj79~JXfepYkik8g00XR~Gmhw1J4Eq33krtFGdnmifc9Qd7fP6zn5~~A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Legislature voted to return LB287 to select file to adopt a technical amendment (AM1000) that corrected drafting errors created when two earlier select-file amendments were merged. Lawmakers then adopted AM1000 and advanced the underlying bill after extended floor discussion about provisions that affect the Omaha Housing Authority (OHA) and special improvement districts (SIDs).

AM1000 and why the return was requested
Senator McKinney moved to return LB287 to select file, explaining AM1000 \"corrects a draft error that would have occurred with the merging of AM 9 61 and AM 9 90, the two amendments adopted on select file,\" and that the change was the result of negotiated language with the City of Omaha and the Omaha Housing Authority. The motion to return to select file passed on a roll call (34 yes, 5 no).

The amendment adopted (AM1000) restored a section that the merger had accidentally removed; the sponsor said it does not create new authorities beyond those already negotiated with municipal officials but ensures the bill takes effect as intended.

Substantive floor questions: OHA, bedbugs, evictions, and city options
Floor discussion focused on local implementation and enforcement. Senators asked whether the amendment would make additional powers mandatory for the City of Omaha or optional and who would bear mitigation costs if bedbugs were found in housing authority units. Senator McKinney and others said the bill gives the City of Omaha optional authority — \"they may use them, they may not\" — and that OHA would remain responsible for costs of mitigation unless the city independently elected to adopt ordinances and assume those responsibilities.

Senators described the impetus for the provision: witnesses and litigants had raised long-standing problems including bedbug infestations, failure to maintain units, and alleged improper eviction practices. The transcript records committee testimony that a class action suit had been filed by tenants alleging eviction and habitability problems; Senator McKinney named bedbugs, lack of maintenance, and eviction procedure lapses as underlying issues that led to the negotiated changes. Floor colloquies described local mitigation options used by OHA in some buildings (for example, high-heat treatment and \"screening\" processes for tenant belongings prior to move-in).

SIDs and taxation beyond district boundaries
Separate but related debate addressed a provision that would permit SIDs, under LB321 language added into LB287, to levy special assessments on properties outside a district when those properties receive a special benefit. Several senators raised a red flag about permitting an SID to collect assessments on parcels outside its corporate boundary, arguing it could create new taxation on property owners who had no vote or representation in the district. Others replied that the change is clarifying language intended to restore longstanding practice after a Nebraska Supreme Court interpretation had restricted assessments on certain outside properties.

Votes and next steps
- Motion to return LB287 to select file: passed (34 yes, 5 no).
- Adoption of AM1000 to LB287: adopted after a recorded vote (the floor recorded 27 yes, 7 no after a call of the house).
- Advancement of LB287 to enrollment and review: machine vote recorded (25 yes, 10 no) and the bill advanced.

Ending note
Floor debate combined technical drafting corrections with substantive concerns about housing maintenance, tenant protections, and limits on local taxing authority. Senators on the floor asked for continued oversight and emphasized the negotiated nature of the amendment with local stakeholders in Omaha.","Lawmakers returned LB287 to select file to insert a technical correction and accepted AM1000, a drafting fix negotiated with the City of Omaha and Omaha Housing Authority; the floor also saw debate about SIDs' authority to assess properties outside their boundaries.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6262699,"Senators reject Anderson amendment to end statewide SNAP waiver; LB192 advances",3924,4877000,8801000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3111934-1cec13eaebe11a43c5992b60ed8dcb89&start=4877&end=8801","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3111934-1cec13eaebe11a43c5992b60ed8dcb89/thumbnail_4877000.jpg","/articles/6262699/Nebraska/Senators-reject-Anderson-amendment-to-end-statewide-SNAP-waiver-LB192-advances","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6262699-f8c622cbe8d5bdf92da81b910171aa2a/orig.mp4?Expires=1773726132&Signature=XlyWG42619-lULdCl5VA6Q77U~Wc0HeP88LYJaVs-ATUtjSPK-B57gQPr~NDCeL6f8rbfakzs4OTkf0lnPapdi6yhJMjKmFw2lqgNeA926ueCAbiYwNt2WCPjSk93trrsJalV6O6n8~1HHAqsdazcuAnSkeU7bxliwInZ0TWSQDrlDBbe1YAv0fAUDWEmnuhB8HCyCyZheujyMHRrA1AtBmHs76Tgyfvolo0FwYM3RNvEFYC7q7gcnDBgzLEfu2vnjz82He69mAL-Ab~T80YaS4JJ80a2s4uU-hOrogzthhN244KazmcmGs4CtMRLNB5zDoXiKVeyMGlMPfVu-kS9Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senator Anderson introduced AM 11:31, an amendment to attach his bill to LB192 that would bar the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) from seeking or renewing a statewide waiver of federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) work requirements and require broader use of the federal Employment & Training (E&T) program. Proponents said the change would restore work expectations and expand help for able-bodied adults without dependents; opponents said the amendment was procedurally hostile to another senator's priority bill and raised unresolved fiscal and rural-tribal impacts.

The amendment was defeated on a roll-call vote (22 yes, 14 no; remaining senators present not voting or absent), and later the underlying LB192 was advanced to enrollment and review on a separate recorded vote.

Why it matters: AM 11:31 sought to remove what the sponsor called a blanket statewide waiver that he said exempted able-bodied SNAP recipients from federal work expectations. Supporters argued that obligating participation in E&T programs will move Nebraskans toward employment and reduce program dependency. Opponents warned the change would have material costs in rural counties and could disproportionately affect tribal communities that have discrete exemptions under federal rules; they also criticized the timing and process of attaching the language to a different senator’s priority bill.

The amendment and debate
Senator Anderson (state senator) said the amendment would prohibit the state from renewing broad waivers to SNAP work requirements and would affirm the state's authority to require participation in federal E&T programs. \"If you want to take money from your friends and family because you have a hard time and you need some help,\" Anderson said, \"it does mean that you have to give something back. In this case, it's enrollment and working with the education and training.\" (Senator Anderson, opening on AM 11:31.)

Senators who spoke in favor — including Senator Hansen and Senator Harden — described the E&T programs as proven pathways back to work. Hansen said Nebraska already funds E&T services and that expanding participation would be constructive in a tight labor market. Harden and others described reported participant outcomes and listed services E&T can provide such as bus passes, background checks, childcare, and skills training.

Opponents — including Senator Quick and Senator Dungan — framed AM 11:31 as a procedural takeover of LB192, which they said was another senator's priority bill. Dungan and Conrad raised the fiscal question: earlier fiscal notes on related language had shown multi-million-dollar costs for building E&T capacity across rural counties; Anderson and his supporters said DHHS and the Department of Labor had worked with the sponsor and revised the amendment language and that the agencies' updated assessment reduced the projected state fiscal impact to zero. Several senators — citing the department's fiscal note and rural implementation logistics — urged caution and asked for documented updated fiscal estimates from DHHS before adopting the change.

Concerns about tribal and rural exemptions also dominated debate. Senators noted that the only routine waivers historically sought in Nebraska have been for tribal areas and for counties with documented job scarcity (e.g., Thurston County). Opponents warned that removing discretionary exemptions could harm residents in sparsely populated areas where E&T capacity and transportation options are limited.

Votes and next steps
On a roll-call vote in the full body, AM 11:31 failed (22 yes, 14 no; remaining senators present not voting or absent). Later, the underlying LB192 (the bill to which the amendment had been offered) advanced to enrollment and review on a recorded machine vote (LB192 advancement recorded as 29 yes, 9 no). The transcript does not show further amendments to LB192 on the floor that day.

Ending note
The debate combined procedural objections with sharply divergent views on the role of work requirements in anti-poverty policy. Supporters framed the measure as a \"hand up\" to help people re-enter the workforce; critics described it as a potentially costly, rural- and tribal-impacting change that required fuller agency estimates and separate consideration rather than attachment to a different senator's priority bill.","A floor amendment that would have banned the state's blanket waiver of federal SNAP work requirements failed on a roll-call vote; the underlying bill expanding childcare licensure provisions (LB192) advanced later in the day.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: confirmations, amendments and bill advancements — Nebraska Legislature, April 22, 2025

Bracket motion filed as senators debate online sports gambling and youth risk

Legislature returns LB287 to correct drafting errors, adopts amendment addressing Omaha Housing Authority issues and SID language

Senators reject Anderson amendment to end statewide SNAP waiver; LB192 advances