Government and Politics of Nebraska Final Exam

Cassandra Griffin

Dr. Paul Landow

The University of Nebraska-Omaha

April 22, 2018

 The relationship between the Governor and the Nebraska legislature has greatly evolved

over the years. Whether this relationship is friendly and collaborative or adversarial largely

depends upon the goals of the legislators and the governor. For example, it would be a fair

evaluation to say that the 2018 unicameral has an overall friendly relationship with Governor

Ricketts. Conservatives won greater victories in the Nebraska legislature in 2016. Many

candidates directly supported by the Governor, either financially or with an endorsement, won

their races (Stoddard & Nohr, 2016). It is natural to then assume that many of those the Governor

helped elect have a very friendly relationship with him. At the same time, many of those in the

unicameral whose policy priorities do not necessarily line up with the Governor’s may have a far

from positive relationship with him.

Ernie Chambers is perhaps one of the best examples of a state senator far from impressed

with Governor Ricketts. When Governor Ricketts wrote the longest-serving senator a card that

Senator Chambers could only describe as “sourly sarcastic”, Senator Chambers also criticized

the Governor for his “heartlessly mean, cruel vetoes” against social services (Hammel, 2017). It

is hard to use the “friendly” descriptor in regards to the relationship between this particular state

senator and the governor. But overall, the governor has a quite friendly relationship with the

unicameral by his own design.

A friendly legislature is certainly efficient in getting bills passed -- in 2017 the

unicameral passed more than 170 bills. Certainly, friendlier legislatures pass more legislation.

However, the legislature also left with a considerable budget shortfall after the advancement of a

budget that focused on tax breaks and cuts in services (Stoddard, 2017). But it is worth

questioning the worth of a legislature that primarily represents the interests of the governor. If
senators are elected with campaign funding that serves as a reward for agreement -- as I will

discuss more on later -- and incumbents are punished with funding for their opponent, it is hard

to say that powers are being balanced. “Getting things done” should not be the goal, adequately

balancing legislative powers and representing the interests of Nebraskans should be. Efficiency

is not worth sacrificing the credibility and fairness of our government.

It would be fair to say that the system of the unicameral itself speeds things up rather than

slows things down, as well. Bills only have to proceed through one house of a legislature rather

than two. Not everyone agrees that the unicameral is speedier, however. Former Lieutenant

Governor Kim Robak argues, “Without a party structure to advance legislation, the process

actually may take longer, which is directly opposite to the theory that unicameralism leads to

faster legislation” (Robak, 1997, p. 23) But as the unicameral becomes more and more partisan,

it is hard to argue that non-partisanship slows things down as it once did. That is not the only

thing that has changed, causing legislation to pass more quickly than it perhaps should.

Filibusters, one of the main tools that senators in the minority have, are limited and grew

more restricted in 2017 (Walton, 2017). It is growing easier and easier to get cloture on a piece

of legislation, and harder to fight against it. Filibusters are a common means of extending debate

on a controversial piece of legislation, and more often senators are losing the fights they wage. A

filibuster in 2018 regarding Title X funding in the budget bill did not last for long, and a

so-called compromise displeased many who were disturbed by budget. Senator Sara Howard,

one of the legislators who worked on the compromise, expressed, “My heart is heavy” (Young,

2018).
 Filibusters are not the only power senators have had taken away from them. Term-limits

have become a barrier to legislators gaining the necessary experience to do their jobs. Senator

Ernie Chambers, the longest-serving in the unicameral, made the point, “The unicameral system

relies on having experienced people in office, because there isn’t a second house to balance

things out. Under term limits, new senators will be easily swayed, tricked and outmaneuvered by

those with other interests.”

Jack Gould of political watchdog group Common Cause echoed Chambers’ concerns:

“Where do you go for advice? Well, you go out in the Rotunda, and there’s about 350 guys out

there paid to give you advice. It’s going to be difficult for them to separate themselves from the

influence of the lobbyists” (Bauer, 2006). Both of their concerns seem well-founded. In 2016,

lobbyist groups exploded with a record $16.8 million spent on lobbying the unicameral and the

number of paid lobbyists in the Nebraska legislature has grown from 13 in 2015 to 364 in 2016

(Nohr, 2017). Senators are increasingly reliant on information they get from lobbyists. Of course

lobbying might make the jobs of senators easier, but efficiency alone cannot be the guiding force

of our state government. Special interests should not be the ones in charge of democratic

decisions.

I believe George Norris, the founding father of Nebraska’s unicameral, would be a

proponent of a speedier, more efficient unicameral. Its efficiency and reduced cost to the

taxpayer was two of Norris’ primary arguments in favor of the unicameral system (The Nebraska

Legislature). But I do not believe that Norris would be in favor of a unicameral that works in the

way that this one does. He would be heavily opposed to a legislature that was more influenced by

lobbyists and less inclined to listen to minorities. He would also be disappointed in the growing
partisanship of the unicameral and the actions of a Governor more determined to expand his own

power rather than to uphold the principles of fairness and balances of power.

The Nebraska Legislature was designed to be “open and accountable”, and many

Nebraskans would agree that the nation’s only unicameral is open and accountable (Berens,

2005, p. 49). But a number of recent changes to the legislature, and specifically to its relationship

with the governor, threatens that transparency and accountability. Senators are losing power,

while the executive of the state and lobbyists only gain more. I would say that Pete Ricketts’

time in office alone is proof that the governor of Nebraska holds too much power in relation to

its legislature. I do not believe the current state of the government of Nebraska was truly the

intent of George Norris, who regarded special interests and the wealthy controlling politics as a

threat to democracy (Landis, 2011).

Nebraska’s current governor typically gets his own way, in the face of a growingly

unempowered legislature. State senators are term-limited, their filibuster power limited, and are

increasingly impacted by lobbying and affected by the governor’s use of his own personal

fortune in local campaigns. Governor Ricketts spent over half a million dollars on campaigns and

causes prior to the 2016 election, and even used his fortune to attempt to unseat incumbents that

did not fall in line with his agenda. That even included Republicans in the governor’s own party.

For example, Republican Senator Les Seiler was unseated by the Ricketts-funded Steve Halloran

after voting against the governor on the death penalty, the gas tax, and allowing driver’s licenses

and professional licenses for young undocumented immigrants (Nohr, 2016).

Former Republican state Senator Colby, who did not run for re-election in 2016 during

term-limits, said, “It’s like he's single-handedly trying to get rid of those who opposed him.
Those of us who care about process and separation of powers, it makes us nervous that that line

is getting blurrier.” The Republican speaker of the unicameral Galen Hadley echoed these

concerns, saying that the Governor is sending a “chilling” message to the legislature, “I’m

concerned about the independence of the legislature as a third branch of government”. Governor

Ricketts, according to political science expert Dr. Paul Landow, wanted a smoother year as

Governor -- and he’s clearly willing to funnel his own money into the process in order to ensure

that future (Phillips, 2016).

Not only does the governor have more influence on who is elected to the legislature, but

on the bills and legislation that the unicameral has real power over. One of the most egregious

examples of the excess of the governor’s power happened during the last legislative session.

Governor Ricketts proposed a budget that would effectively gut Title X services in the state of

Nebraska by restricting health centers that provide abortions from receiving federal Title X

funding. His initial proposal intended to target all clinics that refer or provide patients to abortion

services. Governor Ricketts proposed the budget provision to reflect Nebraska’s status as a “pro

life state” (Young, 2018). Even outside of the inherent hypocrisy of this provision from a

governor who made a name for himself protecting state-sanctioned executions -- there is no place

for a bill intended to target abortion in the state’s budget bill.

An amendment passed that limited allowed referrals for abortions in the case of

emergencies, but revoked federal Title X funding from Planned Parenthood of the Heartland. It is

clear that this budget provision was a direct attack on Planned Parenthood. The Hyde

Amendment prevents federal dollars from being used to fund abortions, and yet the Governor

still claimed that this fight was to promote “pro life” policies. Title X funding covers cancer
screenings, contraception, resources for abuse survivors, and more -- it is incredibly difficult to

see how being “pro life” has anything to do with the actual impacts of this budget. And yet, it

was passed anyway with the help of those the Governor helped elect (Stoddard & Nitcher, 2018).

Women’s healthcare is becoming more in the hands of Governor Ricketts and those who he’s

picked to agree with him rather than in the hands of independent representatives. That is not just

true of women’s health care, either. Our criminal justice system is also increasingly controlled by

Governor Ricketts.

Another example of the governor’s “pro life” legislative priorities is what occurred

regarding the death penalty. The Nebraska legislature won a hard-fought battle against Governor

Ricketts and voted 32-15 to abolish Nebraska’s death penalty. When the legislature overrode the

governor’s veto, he responded by promising to execute as many people as possible before the

law went into effect. Governor Ricketts planned to do this by using illegally imported drugs from

India, which the FDA was required to seize. After this stunningly spiteful disregard for the law,

Governor Ricketts then put $200,000 of his own personal funds towards a petition drive to put

the death penalty on the ballot (Balko, 2015). But of course the language was not put on the

ballot in a direct or easy to understand way, but in confusing terms to “retain” or “repeal” the

death penalty ban. Given that the language was crafted by a death penalty supporting attorney

general, it is difficult to not ask questions regarding the handling of this initiative (Burbach,

2016). It is also hard not to question the missing $54,400 paid by the state for the illegal

execution drugs, which the broker has refused to refund (Duggan, 2016).

Perhaps without a governor that abuses their power, the balance between the political

power of the Governor and the legislature would be more even. But a governor that funnels their
own personal funds into their political goals and is more than content to target those he considers

enemies is a perfect example of why the political system in Nebraska is broken. The legislature

and the Governor should be fairly evenly matched, with wins on both sides. But the unicameral

is continuously losing political power -- in terms of the power of minority legislators,

opportunity to gain experience, and influence from outside groups -- while the governor only

seems to gain it. This is a dangerous imbalance, and it causes Nebraska to appear like more of a

dictatorship run by a multi-millionaire than a democracy.

The balance between the legislature and the executive branch should be relatively even.

The Governor and the legislature should collaborate when possible, but still act as independent

powers. The founding fathers of both this state and this nation did not intend for the Governor to

meddle into the powers of the legislature and the legislature to lose the attributes that give it

authority. The separation of powers and the balance among the three branches of government is

the backbone of our democracy. The more we put power into the hands of one executive at the

expense of other branches, the more we lose sight of what our state and our country should be.
 Works Cited

Balko, R. (2015, September 2). Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts (and his father) spent $300,000 to

save the death penalty. Here’s what he could have bought instead. ​Washington Post​.

Retrieved April 22, 2018, from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/09/02/nebraska-gov-pete-rick

Etts-and-his-father-spent-300000-to-save-the-death-penalty-heres-what-he-could-have-bo

ught-instead/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.25880e36400c

Bauer, S. (2006, March 25). Impact of term limits on state's unicameral government feared.

Lincoln Journal Star​. Retrieved April 22, 2018, from

http://journalstar.com/news/state-and-regional/nebraska/impact-of-term-limits-on-state-s-

unicamer al-government-feared/article_46347502-3ade-56a6-8f65-f3b5e2c57795.html

Berens, C. (2005). ​One House: The Unicameral's Progressive Vision for Nebraska​. Lincoln, NE:

University of Nebraska Press.

Burbach, C. (2016, September 20). Read it carefully: Ballot language for death penalty

referendum is correct, but confusing. ​Omaha World Herald​. Retrieved April 22, 2018,

from http://www.omaha.com/news/politics/read-it-carefully-ballot-language-for-death-pe

Nalty- referendum-is/article_4bfcf695-94a2-55d0-ac2d-7ecc935b9d50.html

Duggan, J. (2016, November 11). With death penalty reinstated in Nebraska, Ricketts plans to

work with attorney general on carrying it out. Omaha World Herald. Retrieved April 22,

2018, from http://www.omaha.com/news/politics/with-death-penalty-reinstated-in-

nebraska-ricketts-plans-to-work/article_0ec2cfca-a697-11e6-a120-f73aef27924b.html

Hammel, P. (2017, July 17). Ernie Chambers says his birthday card from Gov. Pete Ricketts was
 'sour sarcasm'. ​Omaha World Herald​. Retrieved April 22, 2018, from

http://www.omaha.com/news/politics/ernie-chambers-says-his-birthday-card-from-gov-p

ete-ricketts/article_44d43f07-2598-5ca0-aac6-7e62981b3682.html

Landis, D. (2011). George Norris. In ​Encyclopedia of the Great Plains​. Retrieved April 22,

2018,

from http://plainshumanities.unl.edu/encyclopedia/doc/egp.pg.058

The Nebraska Legislature. (n.d.). The Development of the Unicameral. Retrieved April 22, 2018,

from https://nebraskalegislature.gov/education/lesson3.php

Nohr, E. (2016, November 1). Ricketts’ contributions to state legislative races raise concerns

over governor's influence. ​Omaha World Herald​. Retrieved February 23, 2018, from

http://www.omaha.com/news/legislature/ricketts-contributions-to-state-legislative-races-r

aise-concerns-over-governor/article_00295d41-9e33-5c60-8025-4719e03f4130.html

Nohr, E. (2017, March 31). Record $16.8 million spent to lobby Nebraska lawmakers in 2016,

report shows. ​Omaha World Herald​. Retrieved February 23, 2018, from

http://www.omaha.com/news/legislature/record-million-spent-to-lobby-nebraska-lawmak

ers-in-report-shows/article_20618768-1572-11e7-8a26-af58d8f931e9.html

Phillips, A. (2016, November 6). Meet the multi-millionaire GOP governor using his fortune to

push his agenda — and punish his foes. ​Washington Post​. Retrieved April 22, 2018, from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/06/meet-the-multi-millionaire

-gop-governor-using-his-fortune-to-push-his-agenda-and-punish-his-foes/?utm_term=.f0

bb63f7508c

Robak, K. (1997). The Nebraska Unicameral and Its Lasting Benefits. ​The Nebraska Law
 Review, 76​(4), 6th ser., 814-815. Retrieved April 22, 2018, from

https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&ht

tpsredir=1&article=1523&context=nlr.

Stoddard, M. (2017, May 22). Nebraska Legislature passes more than 170 bills, but budget

shortfall casts shadow over 2017 session. ​Omaha World Herald​. Retrieved April 22,

2018, from

http://www.omaha.com/news/legislature/nebraska-legislature-passes-more-than-bills-but-

budget-shortfall-casts/article_3321327f-2c19-5c9f-9f4a-8ed2bad598e0.html

Nitcher, E., & Stoddard, M. (2018, April 1). Despite Nebraska lawmakers' compromise,

questions linger over Title X changes. ​Omaha World Herald​. Retrieved from

http://www.omaha.com/news/legislature/despite-nebraska-lawmakers-compromise-questi

ons-linger-over-title-x-changes/article_9a75c40d-a761-5bae-803d-58d6d65467a4.html

Stoddard, M., & Nohr, E. (2016, November 9). 8 of 14 legislative candidates supported by

Ricketts win, giving the Unicameral a more conservative bent. ​Omaha World Herald​.

Retrieved April 22, 2018, from

http://www.omaha.com/news/politics/of-legislative-candidates-supported-by-ricketts-win

-giving-the-unicameral/article_d1b991b2-a642-11e6-a6d5-0b53db88f82c.html

Walton, D. (2017, February 8). Legislative filibuster rights squeezed. ​Lincoln Journal Star.

Retrieved April 22, 2018, from

http://journalstar.com/legislature/legislative-filibuster-rights-squeezed/article_bd5c6f2b-2

30f-5ddc-bc06-25fdcc429942.html

Young, J. (2018, March 29). Nebraska senators finally move along budget bill; Title X
 compromise hard fought. ​Lincoln Journal Star​. Retrieved April 22, 2018, from

http://journalstar.com/legislature/nebraska-senators-finally-move-along-budget-bill-title-

-compromise/article_3befac6f-431f-505d-bd50-b9fe4ad9a3cc.html