Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civics Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would publish Nebraska lawmakers’ scores on a U.S. naturalization civics test
Summary
Sen. John Fredericksen introduced LB1066, which would require members of the Nebraska Legislature to take a 20-question civics assessment (drawn from the U.S. naturalization test) within 90 days of their oath and have the Clerk publish each member’s score. Committee discussion focused on administration, retakes and whether education rather than testing would better improve civic knowledge.
Senator John Fredericksen introduced LB1066, which would require each member of the Nebraska Legislature to complete a 20-question civics assessment—questions randomly selected from the U.S. naturalization test—within 90 days of taking the oath of office, and would direct the Clerk of the Legislature to publish each member’s score on the Legislature’s website and in official biographies.
Fredericksen told the Executive Board the measure is intended to give Nebraskans “more information about who is representing them” while not changing the constitutional qualifications for office. "Nothing in this bill adds or changes the qualifications for office," Fredericksen said, and a member’s score “does not in any way disqualify them from holding office.” He cited a 2018 survey finding that about 36% of Americans could pass the naturalization test and said the requirement is meant to encourage lawmakers to refresh their civic knowledge.
Committee members questioned how the rule would apply to returning members and how many times a lawmaker could retake the test. Senator Orr asked whether the assessment would be required each time a member took the oath; Fredericksen acknowledged the draft language left room for interpretation and said particulars such as repeat testing and the number of permitted attempts could be refined to avoid undue burden on the Clerk’s office. A committee member also suggested educational alternatives—modeling civic refreshers on the Legislature’s existing mandatory harassment training—rather than relying solely on a scored test.
No one spoke at the microphone in support or opposition; staff reported 78 written letters in support, four in opposition and two neutral for the bill. The hearing was closed on LB1066 with no committee action recorded in the transcript.
The Executive Board did not vote on the measure during the hearing; any changes to frequency, retake rules or administrative procedures would need to be addressed in future committee work if the bill advances.
