BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/shauneen-miranda/">SHAUNEEN MIRANDA</a>

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education on Tuesday said it’s cutting a substantial number of the agency’s staff through a “<a href="https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/workforce-restructuring/reductions-in-force-rif/" target="_blank">reduction in force</a>” process, bringing the department’s workforce to roughly half the number in place when President Donald Trump took office.

According to senior department officials speaking on background to reporters Tuesday evening, roughly 1,315 employees are subject to the initiative. The officials said the employees will get, starting Tuesday, 90 days full pay and benefits and will telework from Wednesday until March 21, when they are placed on administrative leave. &nbsp;

The sweeping cuts are part of a government-wide effort by Trump and billionaire White House adviser Elon Musk to reduce the federal workforce in an effort to slash government spending and reduce what they see as waste.

When Trump took office, the department had 4,133 employees. Following Tuesday’s announcement, the agency said it will have roughly 2,183 workers remaining. In the past several weeks, nearly 600 workers took voluntary resignation opportunities or retirement, according to a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-education-initiates-reduction-force" target="_blank">Tuesday evening press release</a>.

The department also terminated 63 probationary employees in February, according to senior department officials.

The senior officials clarified that this staffing reduction will not impact the department’s ability to deliver on civil rights investigations, the rollout of the federal student aid application, Title I funding for low-income school districts and other statutorily mandated functions Congress has given the agency.

The senior officials confirmed earlier reporting that the department’s Washington-area office buildings would close Tuesday evening for safety reasons and would reopen Thursday.

“Today’s reduction in force reflects the Department of Education’s commitment to efficiency, accountability, and ensuring that resources are directed where they matter most: to students, parents, and teachers,” Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a statement Tuesday.

“I appreciate the work of the dedicated public servants and their contributions to the Department. This is a significant step toward restoring the greatness of the United States education system.”

Congressional Democrats and labor union leaders blasted the cuts Tuesday.

“Today’s staff eliminations are illegal, and they are a slap in the face to the dedicated public servants who work to make sure American children have access to a quality education,” Connecticut U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said. “No president or member of the executive branch has the authority to end public education, violate the law, and unilaterally steal dollars promised to students.”

Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington state Democrat who is the vice chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said the cuts were meant to sidestep the legislative difficulty of eliminating the department itself.

“Donald Trump and Linda McMahon know they can’t abolish the Department of Education on their own but they understand that if you gut it to its very core and fire all the people who run programs that help students, families, and teachers, you might end up with a similar, ruinous result,” she said.

“Ultimately, what they want to do is clear: fire the people who help our kids and gut funding for our students, teachers, and schools. This is about breaking government for working families — and enriching billionaires like themselves in the process.”

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, said “denuding an agency so it cannot function effectively is the most cowardly way of dismantling it.”&nbsp;

“The massive reduction in force at the Education Department is an attack on opportunity that will gut the agency and its ability to support students, throwing federal education programs into chaos across the country,” said Weingarten, who leads one of the largest teachers unions in the country.

Trump has targeted the Education Department specifically in the spending cuts initiative, repeatedly pledging to shutter the 45-year-old agency in his quest to move education “back to the states.”

The department had already seen dramatic shifts in the weeks since Trump took office — from&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/elon-musks-doge-targets-us-department-education-millions-funding-cuts" target="_blank">major contract cuts</a>, to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/28/education-department-quit-00206765" target="_blank">staff buyouts</a>.

Other departments and agencies,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/vets-worry-trump-cuts-va-workforce-will-interrupt-benefits&amp;sa=D&amp;source=docs&amp;ust=1741740543665052&amp;usg=AOvVaw2OZuQ95exTw4F_s_yKUi7E" target="_blank">including the Department of Veterans Affairs</a>, have also seen broad staffing decreases under Trump.

Last week, McMahon&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/new-secretary-linda-mcmahon-unveils-final-mission-us-department-education" target="_blank">sent an email to department employees</a>&nbsp;regarding the agency’s “final mission,” where she detailed her plans to “overhaul” the federal agency.

The former World Wrestling Entertainment executive told employees that the department’s “role in this new era of accountability is to restore the rightful role of state oversight in education and to end the overreach from Washington.”

McMahon said “this restoration will profoundly impact staff, budgets, and agency operations here at the Department.”

Even if Trump were to sign an executive order on dismantling the department, only Congress has the authority to shut it down. Any bill to close down the agency would face extreme difficulties getting through the narrowly GOP-controlled Senate, with at least 60 senators needed to advance past the filibuster.

In her statement, DeLauro dared Republican lawmakers to try to eliminate the department through legislation.

“To my Republican colleagues: if you want to eliminate the Department of Education, then put your name on a bill to do that,” she said. “Let your constituents see it. Let us debate it. Let us and the American people deliberate. Do not yield our authority, and the rule of law, to unchecked billionaires.”

Trump’s push to move education “back to the states” also comes as much of the funding and oversight of schools already occurs at the state and local levels. Legally, the department cannot control the curriculum of schools across the country.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1741729690736.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/shauneen-miranda/">SHAUNEEN MIRANDA</a>WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education on Tuesday said it’s cutting a substantial number of the agency’s staff through a “<a href="https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/workforce-restructuring/reductions-in-force-rif/" target="_blank">reduction in force</a>” process, bringing the department’s workforce to roughly half the number in place when President Donald Trump took office.According to senior department officials speaking on background to reporters Tuesday evening, roughly 1,315 employees are subject to the initiative. The officials said the employees will get, starting Tuesday, 90 days full pay and benefits and will telework from Wednesday until March 21, when they are placed on administrative leave. &nbsp;The sweeping cuts are part of a government-wide effort by Trump and billionaire White House adviser Elon Musk to reduce the federal workforce in an effort to slash government spending and reduce what they see as waste.When Trump took office, the department had 4,133 employees. Following Tuesday’s announcement, the agency said it will have roughly 2,183 workers remaining. In the past several weeks, nearly 600 workers took voluntary resignation opportunities or retirement, according to a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-education-initiates-reduction-force" target="_blank">Tuesday evening press release</a>.The department also terminated 63 probationary employees in February, according to senior department officials.The senior officials clarified that this staffing reduction will not impact the department’s ability to deliver on civil rights investigations, the rollout of the federal student aid application, Title I funding for low-income school districts and other statutorily mandated functions Congress has given the agency.The senior officials confirmed earlier reporting that the department’s Washington-area office buildings would close Tuesday evening for safety reasons and would reopen Thursday.“Today’s reduction in force reflects the Department of Education’s commitment to efficiency, accountability, and ensuring that resources are directed where they matter most: to students, parents, and teachers,” Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a statement Tuesday.“I appreciate the work of the dedicated public servants and their contributions to the Department. This is a significant step toward restoring the greatness of the United States education system.”<h2>Layoffs gut department, Dems say</h2>Congressional Democrats and labor union leaders blasted the cuts Tuesday.“Today’s staff eliminations are illegal, and they are a slap in the face to the dedicated public servants who work to make sure American children have access to a quality education,” Connecticut U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said. “No president or member of the executive branch has the authority to end public education, violate the law, and unilaterally steal dollars promised to students.”Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington state Democrat who is the vice chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said the cuts were meant to sidestep the legislative difficulty of eliminating the department itself.“Donald Trump and Linda McMahon know they can’t abolish the Department of Education on their own but they understand that if you gut it to its very core and fire all the people who run programs that help students, families, and teachers, you might end up with a similar, ruinous result,” she said.“Ultimately, what they want to do is clear: fire the people who help our kids and gut funding for our students, teachers, and schools. This is about breaking government for working families — and enriching billionaires like themselves in the process.”Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, said “denuding an agency so it cannot function effectively is the most cowardly way of dismantling it.”&nbsp;“The massive reduction in force at the Education Department is an attack on opportunity that will gut the agency and its ability to support students, throwing federal education programs into chaos across the country,” said Weingarten, who leads one of the largest teachers unions in the country.<h2>Department overhaul</h2>Trump has targeted the Education Department specifically in the spending cuts initiative, repeatedly pledging to shutter the 45-year-old agency in his quest to move education “back to the states.”The department had already seen dramatic shifts in the weeks since Trump took office — from&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/elon-musks-doge-targets-us-department-education-millions-funding-cuts" target="_blank">major contract cuts</a>, to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/28/education-department-quit-00206765" target="_blank">staff buyouts</a>.Other departments and agencies,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/vets-worry-trump-cuts-va-workforce-will-interrupt-benefits&amp;sa=D&amp;source=docs&amp;ust=1741740543665052&amp;usg=AOvVaw2OZuQ95exTw4F_s_yKUi7E" target="_blank">including the Department of Veterans Affairs</a>, have also seen broad staffing decreases under Trump.Last week, McMahon&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/new-secretary-linda-mcmahon-unveils-final-mission-us-department-education" target="_blank">sent an email to department employees</a>&nbsp;regarding the agency’s “final mission,” where she detailed her plans to “overhaul” the federal agency.The former World Wrestling Entertainment executive told employees that the department’s “role in this new era of accountability is to restore the rightful role of state oversight in education and to end the overreach from Washington.”McMahon said “this restoration will profoundly impact staff, budgets, and agency operations here at the Department.”<h2>Congressional action would be tough</h2>Even if Trump were to sign an executive order on dismantling the department, only Congress has the authority to shut it down. Any bill to close down the agency would face extreme difficulties getting through the narrowly GOP-controlled Senate, with at least 60 senators needed to advance past the filibuster.In her statement, DeLauro dared Republican lawmakers to try to eliminate the department through legislation.“To my Republican colleagues: if you want to eliminate the Department of Education, then put your name on a bill to do that,” she said. “Let your constituents see it. Let us debate it. Let us and the American people deliberate. Do not yield our authority, and the rule of law, to unchecked billionaires.”Trump’s push to move education “back to the states” also comes as much of the funding and oversight of schools already occurs at the state and local levels. Legally, the department cannot control the curriculum of schools across the country.

U.S. Education Department to Cut Hundreds of Staff Members

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/nebraska-lawmakers-could-ask-voters-to-expand-gambling-with-online-sports-betting/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN —&nbsp; Nebraska lawmakers heard from gambling lobbyists that they should expand state gambling to include&nbsp;mobile sports betting, while opponents called out an “industry driven by greed.”

<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58877" target="_blank">Legislative Resolution 20CA</a>, a&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58877" target="_blank">proposed constitutional amendment</a>&nbsp;filed by State Sen. Eliot Bostar of Lincoln, would allow voters to approve online betting in the state. Currently, state law allows casino style gambling at the state’s six existing horse racetracks — so-called “racinos.” Nebraskans approved the change in 2020.&nbsp;

“Nebraska is currently missing out on a $1.6 billion state online industry and $32 million in annual tax revenue,” Bostar said, “which instead goes to neighboring states like Iowa, Colorado, Kansas.”

Bostar said the proposal would be “an opportunity to create a new source of tax revenue for property tax relief.” Before the hearing, Stop Predatory Gambling, Gambling with the Good Life and the Nebraska Family Alliance expressed concerns, saying LR20CA and other similar proposals represent a “direct threat” to families in the state.&nbsp;

Pat Loontjer, executive director of Gambling with the Good Life, said before the hearing that it’s “false” that expanding gambling would reduce property taxes.&nbsp;

“It’s been five years, and I don’t know how many of you have had your property taxes reduced, but no one that I’ve ever met,” Loontjer said. “It’s a lie.”

The Legislature’s&nbsp;General Affairs Committee&nbsp;heard other bills related to state gambling law, including one that would remove a restriction on betting on Nebraska college games when the Cornhuskers are playing at home and others that would make slight revisions to current state gambling law that expands where the taxes collected can go.&nbsp;

“If they want this on the ballot,” said&nbsp;Nate Grasz, the Nebraska Family Alliance executive director.&nbsp;“They should go out and do the work themselves, rather than expect the senators to do it for them.”&nbsp;

Several gambling lobbyists spoke to support the amendment,&nbsp;<a href="https://journalstar.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/nebraska-november-ballot-legalize-online-sports-gambling/article_bf9de872-c5e6-11ee-988f-6b1f2a3a879a.html" target="_blank">pointing to public polling showing support for online sports gambling</a>.“Five years ago, your constituents overwhelmingly passed in-person sports betting when they cast their vote yes on the 2020 ballot legalizing it with the state,”&nbsp;Sarah Meuli, DraftKings Government Affairs Manager, said.&nbsp;“That enthusiasm has only grown.”

Testifiers against the gambling proposals spoke to the moral costs of gambling, saying that expanding gambling to online sports betting would target vulnerable populations and worsen the “epidemic” of teen gambling.

“The house always wins,” said Grasz of the Family Alliance. “For the house to win, the people of Nebraska and our own children … have to lose.”&nbsp;

Bostar said he feels “6-out-of-10” confident that the bill advances out of committee. The other bills have similar arguments. The&nbsp;General Affairs Committee&nbsp;took no immediate action on the gambling proposals.

Examiner reporter Zach Wendling contributed to this report.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1741717788232.jpeg" alt="Les Bernal, national director of Stop Predatory Gambling, right, speaks to reporters before a Nebraska hearing to expand gambling, such as to online sports betting. Pat Loontjer, executive director of Gambling with the Good Life watches in the back. March 10, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)" />
 <figcaption>Les Bernal, national director of Stop Predatory Gambling, right, speaks to reporters before a Nebraska hearing to expand gambling, such as to online sports betting. Pat Loontjer, executive director of Gambling with the Good Life watches in the back. March 10, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)</figcaption>
 </figure>Juan Salinas II<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/nebraska-lawmakers-could-ask-voters-to-expand-gambling-with-online-sports-betting/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN —&nbsp; Nebraska lawmakers heard from gambling lobbyists that they should expand state gambling to include&nbsp;mobile sports betting, while opponents called out an “industry driven by greed.”<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58877" target="_blank">Legislative Resolution 20CA</a>, a&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58877" target="_blank">proposed constitutional amendment</a>&nbsp;filed by State Sen. Eliot Bostar of Lincoln, would allow voters to approve online betting in the state. Currently, state law allows casino style gambling at the state’s six existing horse racetracks — so-called “racinos.” Nebraskans approved the change in 2020.&nbsp;“Nebraska is currently missing out on a $1.6 billion state online industry and $32 million in annual tax revenue,” Bostar said, “which instead goes to neighboring states like Iowa, Colorado, Kansas.”<h2>New opportunity</h2>Bostar said the proposal would be “an opportunity to create a new source of tax revenue for property tax relief.” Before the hearing, Stop Predatory Gambling, Gambling with the Good Life and the Nebraska Family Alliance expressed concerns, saying LR20CA and other similar proposals represent a “direct threat” to families in the state.&nbsp;Pat Loontjer, executive director of Gambling with the Good Life, said before the hearing that it’s “false” that expanding gambling would reduce property taxes.&nbsp;“It’s been five years, and I don’t know how many of you have had your property taxes reduced, but no one that I’ve ever met,” Loontjer said. “It’s a lie.”The Legislature’s&nbsp;General Affairs Committee&nbsp;heard other bills related to state gambling law, including one that would remove a restriction on betting on Nebraska college games when the Cornhuskers are playing at home and others that would make slight revisions to current state gambling law that expands where the taxes collected can go.&nbsp;“If they want this on the ballot,” said&nbsp;Nate Grasz, the Nebraska Family Alliance executive director.&nbsp;“They should go out and do the work themselves, rather than expect the senators to do it for them.”&nbsp;<h2>Testimony mixed</h2>Several gambling lobbyists spoke to support the amendment,&nbsp;<a href="https://journalstar.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/nebraska-november-ballot-legalize-online-sports-gambling/article_bf9de872-c5e6-11ee-988f-6b1f2a3a879a.html" target="_blank">pointing to public polling showing support for online sports gambling</a>.“Five years ago, your constituents overwhelmingly passed in-person sports betting when they cast their vote yes on the 2020 ballot legalizing it with the state,”&nbsp;Sarah Meuli, DraftKings Government Affairs Manager, said.&nbsp;“That enthusiasm has only grown.”Testifiers against the gambling proposals spoke to the moral costs of gambling, saying that expanding gambling to online sports betting would target vulnerable populations and worsen the “epidemic” of teen gambling.“The house always wins,” said Grasz of the Family Alliance. “For the house to win, the people of Nebraska and our own children … have to lose.”&nbsp;Bostar said he feels “6-out-of-10” confident that the bill advances out of committee. The other bills have similar arguments. The&nbsp;General Affairs Committee&nbsp;took no immediate action on the gambling proposals.Examiner reporter Zach Wendling contributed to this report.

Nebraska Lawmakers Could Ask Voters to Expand Gambling with Online Sports Betting

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/10/teachers-praise-bill-for-6-weeks-paid-family-medical-leave-for-all-nebraska-educators/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — Sydney Jensen had scarcely taken a single day off of teaching in eight years before having her first child in 2020, often coming in sick to teach Nebraska students.

She had saved eight weeks of paid leave, but as she faced postpartum depression, she felt returning would be devastating for her mental health, and the eight weeks weren’t enough.

“In truth, I felt like I would not survive it,” Jensen said Monday.

The federal&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/28f-fmla-qualifying-reasons" target="_blank">Family and Medical Leave Act</a>&nbsp;allowed Jensen to extend her leave to a maximum of 12 allowable weeks for significant life events, but the final four weeks came without pay, leading to financial strain, worsening her postpartum depression and creating hardships for her growing family.

“I thought I had done everything right,” Jensen said. “But it still wasn’t enough.”Jensen, a ninth grade English teacher, in Lincoln was one of many supporters to speak in favor of&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59667&amp;docnum=LB440&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 440</a>&nbsp;on Monday, seeking to establish an additional 0.35% payroll fee on Nebraska teachers, matched by local school districts, to cover long-term substitute costs for the first 6 weeks of teachers’ leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act.

For a teacher making $60,000, that’s a monthly fee of about $17.50, according to the Nebraska State Education Association, advocating on behalf of more than 26,000 public school teachers.

Federal law protects workers for up to&nbsp;12 work weeks of unpaid leave&nbsp;in a year, such as for birth and bonding, adoption or foster care placement and serious personal or family health conditions.&nbsp;Teachers’ salaries and benefits are already budgeted for each year, so LB 440 would protect 6 weeks of that federal leave before other accrued paid leave would need to be used.

“For less than $20 a month, we’re gonna give teachers the peace of mind that if they need to take this leave, they won’t have to worry about the financial hardship that accompanies it,” NSEA President Tim Royers told the Education Committee.

State Sen. Ashlei Spivey of Omaha, LB 440’s sponsor, said she suffered severe postpartum depression but was lucky to have an employer who covered paid leave for three months. But she and many teachers said that isn’t the same for frontline teachers who are helping to shape the next generation of students.

An&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/LB-440-amendment.pdf">amendment</a>&nbsp;Spivey offered to the committee would clarify that school districts would still need to pay teachers their full salary and benefits during the covered 6-week leave. Payroll contributions would also be used to cover the&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/FN/LB440_20250307-121348.pdf" target="_blank">operating and administrative costs</a>&nbsp;of the program.

Thirteen states and Washington, D.C., have mandatory paid family medical leave laws, Spivey said. She modeled her bill off of similar teacher payroll contributions toward state insurance and retirement funds.

Spivey noted that the union for most state employees also has negotiated 6 weeks of paid maternity leave, which takes effect July 1.

She said her bill would promote long-term savings by reducing turnover costs through a sustainable, teacher-led funding model, with no state appropriations needed for the program.

“I would always argue that teachers are some of our most important industry and frontline workers,” Spivey said. “They need competitive benefits, they need this … in order to be able to stay in the workforce [and] keep educating our future leaders and workforce.”

Any surplus in the new leave fund exceeding 20% of projected annual needs would be transferred to a separate fund to focus on teacher retention and professional development.

State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil, a former central Nebraska school board member and committee chair, asked Spivey if the bill was still needed after voters approved a&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/06/labor-groups-ring-alarms-over-proposed-changes-to-nebraska-minimum-wage-paid-sick-leave/">minimum level of annual paid sick leave for all employees</a>:&nbsp;at least 40 hours of paid leave, or 56 hours for larger businesses.

State Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward, a substitute teacher and committee vice chair, said she appreciated the program being separate from state dollars. She asked what would happen if contributions weren’t enough to cover the required substitute costs in a given year.

Hughes noted LB 440 would increase costs on districts, which Spivey described as an investment that would supplement, not replace, local “sick banks” to pool leave time.

Spivey said the bill was drafted with past leave requests in mind to create the 0.35% payroll but said she would confirm what would happen in the scenario Hughes had described.

Royers, as he did in January, said the legislation is the result of a&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/01/28/nsea-lawmakers-outline-2025-priorities-after-survey-of-nearly-10000-nebraska-teachers/">fall survey of nearly 10,000 Nebraska teachers</a>. The issue encompassed all types of leave,&nbsp;he said,&nbsp;not just maternity or paternity.

“We have a crisis of faith right now for teachers in Nebraska,” Royers said of the survey. “Just 8% of our educators feel that this body takes them into account when it crafts education policy.”

Nora Lenz, a Lincoln teacher with more than 30 years experience, said her parents were placed in a nursing home in the summer of 2019, and Lenz was with her mother Friday through Sunday so she wouldn’t be alone, 150 miles away from Lincoln.

In January 2020, Lenz’s father fell ill, and Lenz said it was clear he was losing his will to live, and his condition got even more fragile in the face of the “looming threat” of COVID-19.

Early retirement wasn’t an option for Lenz, and she couldn’t afford to go without a salary, needing to support her children in high school and college.

Her father was hospitalized, and Lenz’s heart ached to be by his side and by her mother’s side.

“To this day, I regret not being there with them sooner, before he was hospitalized,” Lenz said.

Lenz said she held her father’s hand when he took his last breath and was with him in the final days of his life, but told the committee she believes that had she been with him sooner, he might have lived just a little longer. Lenz’s mother died 17 days later.

Sheila Janssen said that she had a stroke in her brainstem on June 6, 2022, at 43 years old, and was in the hospital for nine days. She spent about five weeks in the hospital but, without enough sick leave, returned to school on the first day, on Aug. 10, 2022.

“I probably had no business being there,” Janssen said. “But I was because I couldn’t do it financially.”

Jake Bogus of Lincoln, an eighth grade U.S. history teacher, said some families are facing scenarios “almost like a Margaret Atwood novel,” trying to time pregnancies to use as little paid time off as possible or asking for donated time to care for their newborn children.&nbsp;

Other testifiers said they were stuck with a choice: family or financial stability as they or loved ones faced cancer, hip replacements, foster care obligations or loved ones in hospice care. Many current and retired teachers said they felt guilty over the choice they made.

Now at 32 weeks pregnant with her second child, Jensen has about 30 days of leave saved up from the past few years. However, she noted that one in seven new mothers will face postpartum depression, and her experience increases her future risk.

Jensen said LB 440 would help address a system that is forcing “impossible choices” and disproportionately impacting younger teachers and women, contributing to burnout and turnover.

“Teachers shouldn’t have to choose between their families or financial stability,” Jensen said. “LB 440 aligns Nebraska’s education system with modern workforce needs and demonstrates that we value the well being of those who&nbsp;shape&nbsp;our children’s futures.”

The committee took no immediate action on LB 440.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1741717666884.jpeg" alt="Tim Royers, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, center, talks about 2025 priorities for the teachers union. Jan. 28, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)" />
 <figcaption>Tim Royers, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, center, talks about 2025 priorities for the teachers union. Jan. 28, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)</figcaption>
 </figure>Zach Wendling<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/10/teachers-praise-bill-for-6-weeks-paid-family-medical-leave-for-all-nebraska-educators/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — Sydney Jensen had scarcely taken a single day off of teaching in eight years before having her first child in 2020, often coming in sick to teach Nebraska students.She had saved eight weeks of paid leave, but as she faced postpartum depression, she felt returning would be devastating for her mental health, and the eight weeks weren’t enough.“In truth, I felt like I would not survive it,” Jensen said Monday.The federal&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/28f-fmla-qualifying-reasons" target="_blank">Family and Medical Leave Act</a>&nbsp;allowed Jensen to extend her leave to a maximum of 12 allowable weeks for significant life events, but the final four weeks came without pay, leading to financial strain, worsening her postpartum depression and creating hardships for her growing family.“I thought I had done everything right,” Jensen said. “But it still wasn’t enough.”Jensen, a ninth grade English teacher, in Lincoln was one of many supporters to speak in favor of&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59667&amp;docnum=LB440&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 440</a>&nbsp;on Monday, seeking to establish an additional 0.35% payroll fee on Nebraska teachers, matched by local school districts, to cover long-term substitute costs for the first 6 weeks of teachers’ leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act.For a teacher making $60,000, that’s a monthly fee of about $17.50, according to the Nebraska State Education Association, advocating on behalf of more than 26,000 public school teachers.Federal law protects workers for up to&nbsp;12 work weeks of unpaid leave&nbsp;in a year, such as for birth and bonding, adoption or foster care placement and serious personal or family health conditions.&nbsp;Teachers’ salaries and benefits are already budgeted for each year, so LB 440 would protect 6 weeks of that federal leave before other accrued paid leave would need to be used.“For less than $20 a month, we’re gonna give teachers the peace of mind that if they need to take this leave, they won’t have to worry about the financial hardship that accompanies it,” NSEA President Tim Royers told the Education Committee.No one testified against the bill.<h2>‘Most important industry’</h2>State Sen. Ashlei Spivey of Omaha, LB 440’s sponsor, said she suffered severe postpartum depression but was lucky to have an employer who covered paid leave for three months. But she and many teachers said that isn’t the same for frontline teachers who are helping to shape the next generation of students.An&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/LB-440-amendment.pdf">amendment</a>&nbsp;Spivey offered to the committee would clarify that school districts would still need to pay teachers their full salary and benefits during the covered 6-week leave. Payroll contributions would also be used to cover the&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/FN/LB440_20250307-121348.pdf" target="_blank">operating and administrative costs</a>&nbsp;of the program.Thirteen states and Washington, D.C., have mandatory paid family medical leave laws, Spivey said. She modeled her bill off of similar teacher payroll contributions toward state insurance and retirement funds.Spivey noted that the union for most state employees also has negotiated 6 weeks of paid maternity leave, which takes effect July 1.She said her bill would promote long-term savings by reducing turnover costs through a sustainable, teacher-led funding model, with no state appropriations needed for the program.“I would always argue that teachers are some of our most important industry and frontline workers,” Spivey said. “They need competitive benefits, they need this … in order to be able to stay in the workforce [and] keep educating our future leaders and workforce.”Any surplus in the new leave fund exceeding 20% of projected annual needs would be transferred to a separate fund to focus on teacher retention and professional development.<h2>Committee leaders weigh in</h2>State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil, a former central Nebraska school board member and committee chair, asked Spivey if the bill was still needed after voters approved a&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/06/labor-groups-ring-alarms-over-proposed-changes-to-nebraska-minimum-wage-paid-sick-leave/">minimum level of annual paid sick leave for all employees</a>:&nbsp;at least 40 hours of paid leave, or 56 hours for larger businesses.State Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward, a substitute teacher and committee vice chair, said she appreciated the program being separate from state dollars. She asked what would happen if contributions weren’t enough to cover the required substitute costs in a given year.Hughes noted LB 440 would increase costs on districts, which Spivey described as an investment that would supplement, not replace, local “sick banks” to pool leave time.Spivey said the bill was drafted with past leave requests in mind to create the 0.35% payroll but said she would confirm what would happen in the scenario Hughes had described.Royers, as he did in January, said the legislation is the result of a&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/01/28/nsea-lawmakers-outline-2025-priorities-after-survey-of-nearly-10000-nebraska-teachers/">fall survey of nearly 10,000 Nebraska teachers</a>. The issue encompassed all types of leave,&nbsp;he said,&nbsp;not just maternity or paternity.“We have a crisis of faith right now for teachers in Nebraska,” Royers said of the survey. “Just 8% of our educators feel that this body takes them into account when it crafts education policy.”<h2>Teachers face guilt, regret</h2>Nora Lenz, a Lincoln teacher with more than 30 years experience, said her parents were placed in a nursing home in the summer of 2019, and Lenz was with her mother Friday through Sunday so she wouldn’t be alone, 150 miles away from Lincoln.In January 2020, Lenz’s father fell ill, and Lenz said it was clear he was losing his will to live, and his condition got even more fragile in the face of the “looming threat” of COVID-19.Early retirement wasn’t an option for Lenz, and she couldn’t afford to go without a salary, needing to support her children in high school and college.Her father was hospitalized, and Lenz’s heart ached to be by his side and by her mother’s side.“To this day, I regret not being there with them sooner, before he was hospitalized,” Lenz said.Lenz said she held her father’s hand when he took his last breath and was with him in the final days of his life, but told the committee she believes that had she been with him sooner, he might have lived just a little longer. Lenz’s mother died 17 days later.Sheila Janssen said that she had a stroke in her brainstem on June 6, 2022, at 43 years old, and was in the hospital for nine days. She spent about five weeks in the hospital but, without enough sick leave, returned to school on the first day, on Aug. 10, 2022.“I probably had no business being there,” Janssen said. “But I was because I couldn’t do it financially.”Jake Bogus of Lincoln, an eighth grade U.S. history teacher, said some families are facing scenarios “almost like a Margaret Atwood novel,” trying to time pregnancies to use as little paid time off as possible or asking for donated time to care for their newborn children.&nbsp;Other testifiers said they were stuck with a choice: family or financial stability as they or loved ones faced cancer, hip replacements, foster care obligations or loved ones in hospice care. Many current and retired teachers said they felt guilty over the choice they made.<h2>Balancing ‘impossible choices’</h2>Now at 32 weeks pregnant with her second child, Jensen has about 30 days of leave saved up from the past few years. However, she noted that one in seven new mothers will face postpartum depression, and her experience increases her future risk.Jensen said LB 440 would help address a system that is forcing “impossible choices” and disproportionately impacting younger teachers and women, contributing to burnout and turnover.“Teachers shouldn’t have to choose between their families or financial stability,” Jensen said. “LB 440 aligns Nebraska’s education system with modern workforce needs and demonstrates that we value the well being of those who&nbsp;shape&nbsp;our children’s futures.”The committee took no immediate action on LB 440.

Teachers praise bill for 6 weeks paid family, medical leave for all Nebraska educators

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/10/bill-to-prevent-local-rent-controls-in-nebraska-moves-a-step-forward-with-certain-exceptions/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN —&nbsp;A measure that would prevent local governments from imposing rent controls on private property, with some exceptions, took a step forward in the Nebraska Legislature on Monday.

<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/Intro/LB266.pdf" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 266,</a>&nbsp;introduced by State Sen. Rob Dover of Norfolk, moved ahead on a 32-5 vote despite objections from a handful of Democratic lawmakers.

Under LB 266, cities and counties generally would be prohibited from enacting local laws that have the effect of placing rent controls on private property.&nbsp;

The bill outlines exemptions for ordinances aimed at increasing the affordable housing supply “through land use or inclusionary housing requirements” or for programs in which the landlord voluntarily and contractually agrees to rent restrictions.

Dover told fellow lawmakers that 37 other states had enacted similar legislation prohibiting rent controls, and he believes it is better to “look at what is going on in the country and get in front of it.”

State Sen. John Cavanaugh of Omaha was among several lawmakers who said they’ve not heard of any city in Nebraska proposing rent controls and who saw the bill as unnecessary trampling on local control.

“It solves no problem and has the potential to cause other problems,” Cavanaugh said. “We are inadvertently going to stifle any innovation of solving the problem of affordable housing.”

State Sen. Ashlei Spivey of Omaha agreed, saying the law would preempt local governments from exploring policies that might make sense in their respective communities.&nbsp;

State Sen. Terrell McKinney of Omaha said the conversation should be more focused on how to create more affordable housing, which lawmakers regardless of party affiliation continue to say is one of the most pressing issues facing the state.

North Platte State Sen. Mike Jacobson, who supported the prohibition and the bill, said supply and demand should rule. He said private landlords should have the ability to set higher rents to make their own payments.

“The more things we could do preemptively to assure people who want to invest in properties or build new properties that they’re not going to be faced with this, the more they’re going to be encouraged to build more housing,” said Jacobson.

“If you want cheaper rent, you’re either gonna drop down in the quality of the home or apartment you live in, or we’re gonna have to get a handle on increased property taxes, increased insurance costs and lower interest rates.”

State Sen. Rita Sanders of Bellevue, the chair of the committee that earlier advanced LB 266 to the full Legislature, had filed a potential conflict of interest statement with the Nebraska Accountability and Disclosure Commission. She said that her husband’s business owns commercial and residential retirement real estate properties and she is a contingent beneficiary.

She said some might believe the retirement communities could benefit from the prevention of rent control. Sanders said that while that was “highly unlikely,” her disclosure was done out of “abundance of caution.”

Sanders did not recuse herself from chairing her committee when LB 266 surfaced, because she said any potential benefit is “extremely remote.” The form stated that if the senator had a conflict with LB 266, “it would seem that every senator who owns or has an interest in residential rental property in Nebraska is subject to a potential conflict of interest.”

Dover, whose business manages real estate properties and who has rental properties, said he did not see a potential for personal enrichment from LB 266 and did not file a potential conflict of interest form.

He said he views affordable housing as a personal priority during his legislative term and has at least two pending bills. His&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59802&amp;docnum=LB626&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">LB 626</a>&nbsp;would make it easier to use tax-increment financing in the production of workforce housing.

His&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59803&amp;docnum=LB622&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">LB 622</a>&nbsp;would&nbsp;create the Statewide Housing Assistance Program, administered by a nonprofit under a contract by the state, to provide downpayment assistance loans toward the purchase of a new home. The bill would raise the documentary stamp tax to help fund the program.&nbsp;Counties collect a documentary stamp tax on the transfer of real estate, a portion of which is remitted to the state and currently used for funds related to such things as affordable housing and homeless shelter assistance.

Cindy Gonzalez<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/10/bill-to-prevent-local-rent-controls-in-nebraska-moves-a-step-forward-with-certain-exceptions/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN —&nbsp;A measure that would prevent local governments from imposing rent controls on private property, with some exceptions, took a step forward in the Nebraska Legislature on Monday.<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/109/PDF/Intro/LB266.pdf" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 266,</a>&nbsp;introduced by State Sen. Rob Dover of Norfolk, moved ahead on a 32-5 vote despite objections from a handful of Democratic lawmakers.Under LB 266, cities and counties generally would be prohibited from enacting local laws that have the effect of placing rent controls on private property.&nbsp;The bill outlines exemptions for ordinances aimed at increasing the affordable housing supply “through land use or inclusionary housing requirements” or for programs in which the landlord voluntarily and contractually agrees to rent restrictions.Dover told fellow lawmakers that 37 other states had enacted similar legislation prohibiting rent controls, and he believes it is better to “look at what is going on in the country and get in front of it.”<h2>Stifling innovation</h2>State Sen. John Cavanaugh of Omaha was among several lawmakers who said they’ve not heard of any city in Nebraska proposing rent controls and who saw the bill as unnecessary trampling on local control.“It solves no problem and has the potential to cause other problems,” Cavanaugh said. “We are inadvertently going to stifle any innovation of solving the problem of affordable housing.”State Sen. Ashlei Spivey of Omaha agreed, saying the law would preempt local governments from exploring policies that might make sense in their respective communities.&nbsp;State Sen. Terrell McKinney of Omaha said the conversation should be more focused on how to create more affordable housing, which lawmakers regardless of party affiliation continue to say is one of the most pressing issues facing the state.North Platte State Sen. Mike Jacobson, who supported the prohibition and the bill, said supply and demand should rule. He said private landlords should have the ability to set higher rents to make their own payments.“The more things we could do preemptively to assure people who want to invest in properties or build new properties that they’re not going to be faced with this, the more they’re going to be encouraged to build more housing,” said Jacobson.“If you want cheaper rent, you’re either gonna drop down in the quality of the home or apartment you live in, or we’re gonna have to get a handle on increased property taxes, increased insurance costs and lower interest rates.”<h2>Potential conflict</h2>State Sen. Rita Sanders of Bellevue, the chair of the committee that earlier advanced LB 266 to the full Legislature, had filed a potential conflict of interest statement with the Nebraska Accountability and Disclosure Commission. She said that her husband’s business owns commercial and residential retirement real estate properties and she is a contingent beneficiary.She said some might believe the retirement communities could benefit from the prevention of rent control. Sanders said that while that was “highly unlikely,” her disclosure was done out of “abundance of caution.”Sanders did not recuse herself from chairing her committee when LB 266 surfaced, because she said any potential benefit is “extremely remote.” The form stated that if the senator had a conflict with LB 266, “it would seem that every senator who owns or has an interest in residential rental property in Nebraska is subject to a potential conflict of interest.”Dover, whose business manages real estate properties and who has rental properties, said he did not see a potential for personal enrichment from LB 266 and did not file a potential conflict of interest form.He said he views affordable housing as a personal priority during his legislative term and has at least two pending bills. His&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59802&amp;docnum=LB626&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">LB 626</a>&nbsp;would make it easier to use tax-increment financing in the production of workforce housing.His&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59803&amp;docnum=LB622&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">LB 622</a>&nbsp;would&nbsp;create the Statewide Housing Assistance Program, administered by a nonprofit under a contract by the state, to provide downpayment assistance loans toward the purchase of a new home. The bill would raise the documentary stamp tax to help fund the program.&nbsp;Counties collect a documentary stamp tax on the transfer of real estate, a portion of which is remitted to the state and currently used for funds related to such things as affordable housing and homeless shelter assistance.

Bill to prevent local rent controls in Nebraska moves a step forward, with certain exceptions

LINCOLN — State lawmakers again punted Tuesday on making a final decision on how to end Nebraska’s twice-a-year changing of the clocks back and forth, leaving it up to one more debate.

Lawmakers&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/year-round-standard-time-daylight-saving-time-bills-both-advance-from-nebraska-committee/">again</a>&nbsp;advanced&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58980" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 34</a>, from State Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha for permanent daylight saving time (the current position of the clocks as of this past Sunday through early November), and&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59293&amp;docnum=LB302&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">LB 302</a>, from State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil for permanent standard time (in the winter months between November and early March), this time to the third and final round of debate.&nbsp;

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/02/20/lawmakers-advance-competing-bills-to-end-nebraskas-twice-yearly-clock-changing/">Unlike the first round of debate</a>&nbsp;three weeks ago, more lawmakers picked only one of the options:

State Sen. Merv Riepe of Ralston voted against permanent daylight saving time (LB 34) and was “present, not voting” on permanent standard time (LB 302). He confirmed to the Nebraska Examiner that he supports permanent standard time.

Speaker John Arch of La Vista is in charge of scheduling and told the Examiner that, should both bills pass during the final round of debate, the decision goes to Gov. Jim Pillen.&nbsp;

If Pillen also signs both bills, the final bill he signs would become law.

A spokesperson for Pillen did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the bills.

Both bills would require surrounding states to adopt similar laws before taking effect:

Hunt has advocated for year-round daylight time to have the sun later in the evening, particularly in summer months, to help businesses and economic development.&nbsp;

Murman has received support from the Nebraska Medical Association and other major medical organizations for year-round standard time, for purported health benefits better aligned with natural circadian rhythms.

Year-round daylight saving time, from Hunt, would require federal approval, either through Congress or a rule change from the U.S. secretary of&nbsp;transportation. The United States briefly had year-round daylight saving time between Jan. 6, 1974, and April 27, 1975, in response to the 1973 oil crisis.

States can choose to adopt year-round standard time, which Hawaii and Arizona (excluding the Navajo Nation) observe.

How lawmakers voted during the second round of 2025 debate on changing clocks

Advance BOTH permanent daylight saving AND standard time (13):&nbsp;Christy Armendariz, John Cavanaugh, Stan Clouse, Danielle Conrad, George Dungan, Jana Hughes, Teresa Ibach, Margo Juarez, Jane Raybould, Victor Rountree, Rita Sanders, Ashlei Spivey, Paul Strommen

OPPOSE both bills (5):&nbsp;John Arch, Carolyn Bosn, Rob Clements, Rob Dover, Rick Holdcroft

Advance ONLY permanent DAYLIGHT SAVING time (14):&nbsp;Bob Andersen, Eliot Bostar, Machaela Cavanaugh, Wendy DeBoer, Myron Dorn, John Fredrickson, Dunixi Guereca, Bob Hallstrom, Megan Hunt, Terrelll McKinney, Jason Prokop, Dan Quick, Tony Sorrentino, Brad von Gillern

Advance ONLY permanent STANDARD time (14*):&nbsp;Tom Brandt, Barry DeKay, Ben Hansen, Mike Jacobson, Kathleen Kauth, Loren Lippincott, Dan Lonowski, Dan McKeon, Glen Meyer, Mike Moser, Dave Murman, Tanya Storer, Jared Storm, Woody Wordekemper

DID NOT VOTE on both bills (2):&nbsp;Beau Ballard, Brian Hardin

*State Sen. Merv Riepe opposed daylight saving time and was “present, not voting” on standard time. He confirmed he supports permanent standard time after the votes.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1741717473865.jpeg" alt=" State Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha. Aug. 8, 2024. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)" />
 <figcaption> State Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha. Aug. 8, 2024. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)</figcaption>
 </figure>LINCOLN — State lawmakers again punted Tuesday on making a final decision on how to end Nebraska’s twice-a-year changing of the clocks back and forth, leaving it up to one more debate.Lawmakers&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/year-round-standard-time-daylight-saving-time-bills-both-advance-from-nebraska-committee/">again</a>&nbsp;advanced&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58980" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 34</a>, from State Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha for permanent daylight saving time (the current position of the clocks as of this past Sunday through early November), and&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59293&amp;docnum=LB302&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">LB 302</a>, from State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil for permanent standard time (in the winter months between November and early March), this time to the third and final round of debate.&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/02/20/lawmakers-advance-competing-bills-to-end-nebraskas-twice-yearly-clock-changing/">Unlike the first round of debate</a>&nbsp;three weeks ago, more lawmakers picked only one of the options:<ul>
 <li>14 senators supported only&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_votes.php?KeyID=11782#" target="_blank">permanent standard time</a>.</li><li>14 senators supported only&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_votes.php?KeyID=11785#" target="_blank">permanent daylight saving time</a>.</li><li>13 senators supported both bills.</li><li>5 senators voted against both bills.</li><li>2 senators did not take a position on either bill.</li>
 </ul>State Sen. Merv Riepe of Ralston voted against permanent daylight saving time (LB 34) and was “present, not voting” on permanent standard time (LB 302). He confirmed to the Nebraska Examiner that he supports permanent standard time.Speaker John Arch of La Vista is in charge of scheduling and told the Examiner that, should both bills pass during the final round of debate, the decision goes to Gov. Jim Pillen.&nbsp;If Pillen also signs both bills, the final bill he signs would become law.A spokesperson for Pillen did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the bills.Both bills would require surrounding states to adopt similar laws before taking effect:<ul>
 <li>For Hunt’s bill, three adjacent states to Nebraska would need to adopt a single year-round&nbsp;time.</li><li>For Murman’s bill, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota and Wyoming would all need to adopt legislation for year-round standard time. Multiple senators have said the list should include Colorado, to prevent a “southwest Nebraska time-zone island.”</li>
 </ul>Hunt has advocated for year-round daylight time to have the sun later in the evening, particularly in summer months, to help businesses and economic development.&nbsp;Murman has received support from the Nebraska Medical Association and other major medical organizations for year-round standard time, for purported health benefits better aligned with natural circadian rhythms.Year-round daylight saving time, from Hunt, would require federal approval, either through Congress or a rule change from the U.S. secretary of&nbsp;transportation. The United States briefly had year-round daylight saving time between Jan. 6, 1974, and April 27, 1975, in response to the 1973 oil crisis.States can choose to adopt year-round standard time, which Hawaii and Arizona (excluding the Navajo Nation) observe.<h2>How lawmakers voted during the second round of 2025 debate on changing clocks</h2>Advance BOTH permanent daylight saving AND standard time (13):&nbsp;Christy Armendariz, John Cavanaugh, Stan Clouse, Danielle Conrad, George Dungan, Jana Hughes, Teresa Ibach, Margo Juarez, Jane Raybould, Victor Rountree, Rita Sanders, Ashlei Spivey, Paul StrommenOPPOSE both bills (5):&nbsp;John Arch, Carolyn Bosn, Rob Clements, Rob Dover, Rick HoldcroftAdvance ONLY permanent DAYLIGHT SAVING time (14):&nbsp;Bob Andersen, Eliot Bostar, Machaela Cavanaugh, Wendy DeBoer, Myron Dorn, John Fredrickson, Dunixi Guereca, Bob Hallstrom, Megan Hunt, Terrelll McKinney, Jason Prokop, Dan Quick, Tony Sorrentino, Brad von GillernAdvance ONLY permanent STANDARD time (14*):&nbsp;Tom Brandt, Barry DeKay, Ben Hansen, Mike Jacobson, Kathleen Kauth, Loren Lippincott, Dan Lonowski, Dan McKeon, Glen Meyer, Mike Moser, Dave Murman, Tanya Storer, Jared Storm, Woody WordekemperDID NOT VOTE on both bills (2):&nbsp;Beau Ballard, Brian Hardin*State Sen. Merv Riepe opposed daylight saving time and was “present, not voting” on standard time. He confirmed he supports permanent standard time after the votes.

Nebraska lawmakers again punt final choice between permanent daylight, standard time

&nbsp;(Norfolk, Neb.)&nbsp;&nbsp;— Troopers with the Nebraska State Patrol have arrested one person after locating over 250 pounds of marijuana during a traffic stop in northern Nebraska.

Friday, at approximately 7:20 p.m., a trooper performed a traffic stop on Highway 20 on a Chevrolet Silverado with a driver known to have a suspended license. The traffic stop occurred near the intersection of Highway 20 and Highway 81. During the traffic stop, the trooper saw marijuana in plain view in the pickup.

A search of the vehicle revealed several bags of marijuana in the cab and bed of the pickup. The total weight of the marijuana was 252 pounds.

The driver, Coty Weber, 40, of Saint Peter, Minnesota, was arrested for driving under suspension, possession of marijuana – more than one pound, and possession with intent to deliver. He was lodged in Pierce County Jail.

Cody ThomasNebraska State Patrol&nbsp;(Norfolk, Neb.)&nbsp;&nbsp;— Troopers with the Nebraska State Patrol have arrested one person after locating over 250 pounds of marijuana during a traffic stop in northern Nebraska.Friday, at approximately 7:20 p.m., a trooper performed a traffic stop on Highway 20 on a Chevrolet Silverado with a driver known to have a suspended license. The traffic stop occurred near the intersection of Highway 20 and Highway 81. During the traffic stop, the trooper saw marijuana in plain view in the pickup.A search of the vehicle revealed several bags of marijuana in the cab and bed of the pickup. The total weight of the marijuana was 252 pounds.The driver, Coty Weber, 40, of Saint Peter, Minnesota, was arrested for driving under suspension, possession of marijuana – more than one pound, and possession with intent to deliver. He was lodged in Pierce County Jail.

Troopers Find 250 LBs of Marijuana in Highway 20 Traffic Stop In Eastern Nebraska

LINCOLN, NE&nbsp;– Today, Governor Jim Pillen announced his appointment of Katie Thurber as commissioner for the Nebraska Department of Labor (NDOL). Thurber has been serving in the interim role since December. Her appointment will be effective pending confirmation by the Legislature.

Thurber has been with NDOL since 2012. Since that time, she has served several roles including administrative hearing officer, legal counsel, general counsel and most recently deputy commissioner of operations.

Thurber has a degree in mathematics from Birmingham-Southern College and earned her juris doctor at the University of Nebraska College of Law.

Office of Governor Jim PillenLINCOLN, NE&nbsp;– Today, Governor Jim Pillen announced his appointment of Katie Thurber as commissioner for the Nebraska Department of Labor (NDOL). Thurber has been serving in the interim role since December. Her appointment will be effective pending confirmation by the Legislature.Thurber has been with NDOL since 2012. Since that time, she has served several roles including administrative hearing officer, legal counsel, general counsel and most recently deputy commissioner of operations.Thurber has a degree in mathematics from Birmingham-Southern College and earned her juris doctor at the University of Nebraska College of Law.

Governor Jim Pillen Appoints Katie Thurber as Labor Commissioner

LINCOLN, NE&nbsp;– Governor Jim Pillen thanked the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee, under the leadership of Chairperson Rita Sanders, for advancing&nbsp; Winner-Take-All to the floor for debate by the full Legislature.

“Winner-Take-All – which would restore unity to Nebraska’s allocation of electoral college votes and strengthen our voice in presidential elections – just passed out of the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee and will receive floor consideration by the full Legislature. This is great news for Nebraska and I’m grateful to Chair Rita Sanders and the great senators who voted to advance WTA for their leadership.”

Office of Governor Jim PillenLINCOLN, NE&nbsp;– Governor Jim Pillen thanked the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee, under the leadership of Chairperson Rita Sanders, for advancing&nbsp; Winner-Take-All to the floor for debate by the full Legislature.“Winner-Take-All – which would restore unity to Nebraska’s allocation of electoral college votes and strengthen our voice in presidential elections – just passed out of the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee and will receive floor consideration by the full Legislature. This is great news for Nebraska and I’m grateful to Chair Rita Sanders and the great senators who voted to advance WTA for their leadership.”

Governor Jim Pillen Thanks Committee for Advancing Winner-Take-All

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/bill-to-open-unemployment-benefits-to-immigrant-dreamers-advances-to-legislative-debate/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — Nebraska is a step closer to joining other states in allowing “Dreamers” — and other immigrants who have legal permission to work in the U.S. but who lack permanent residency — access to unemployment insurance benefits.

The Legislature’s Business and Labor Committee, despite concerns raised during a previous public hearing, voted last week to advance&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58813&amp;docnum=LB299&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 299</a>&nbsp;on to full debate by the Legislature.

State Sen. Teresa Ibach of Sumner, who introduced the bill along with Sen. Margo Juarez of Omaha, said the U.S. Department of Labor had flagged a “technical” problem with language in the initial draft, which put federal funding at risk. She said federal and local labor officials worked to resolve the issue.

“Once that was fixed, the committee moved to advance it to the floor for debate by the entire Legislature,” Ibach said. “Nebraska is the only state that does not allow legal work authorized immigrants to collect unemployment and retirement benefits that they have paid into.”

The previous Feb. 10 public hearing on LB 299 drew testimony that was overwhelmingly in favor of the bill.

Among those who spoke were Nebraska Dreamers, immigrants who grew up in the U.S. after being brought to this country as minors by their parents and who qualified for the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.&nbsp;Those Dreamers, under current Nebraska law, would not be able to receive unemployment benefits, despite that they work with proper authorization and that their employers are required to pay unemployment insurance taxes on their behalf.

In addition to Dreamers, others&nbsp;who would benefit from LB 299 are asylum-seekers who have been granted work authorization while their requests are reviewed and those with Temporary Protected Status, which is granted when returning to a person’s home country is unsafe due to natural disaster, extraordinary conditions or war.

The lone opponent who testified during the public hearing, interim Nebraska Labor Commissioner Katie Thurber, noted the now-addressed problem that had been raised by federal officials. She said more than $400 million in federal unemployment tax credits was at stake because the language was written too broadly, and reached beyond certain federal requirements.

State Sen. Jane Raybould of Lincoln challenged that at the time, saying: “I find it really hard to believe that we in the state of Nebraska can not get it right like all the other 49 states have done to make sure we are in conformity.”

A similar bill introduced in 2021 failed to pass into law.

Cindy Gonzalez<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/bill-to-open-unemployment-benefits-to-immigrant-dreamers-advances-to-legislative-debate/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — Nebraska is a step closer to joining other states in allowing “Dreamers” — and other immigrants who have legal permission to work in the U.S. but who lack permanent residency — access to unemployment insurance benefits.The Legislature’s Business and Labor Committee, despite concerns raised during a previous public hearing, voted last week to advance&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58813&amp;docnum=LB299&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 299</a>&nbsp;on to full debate by the Legislature.State Sen. Teresa Ibach of Sumner, who introduced the bill along with Sen. Margo Juarez of Omaha, said the U.S. Department of Labor had flagged a “technical” problem with language in the initial draft, which put federal funding at risk. She said federal and local labor officials worked to resolve the issue.“Once that was fixed, the committee moved to advance it to the floor for debate by the entire Legislature,” Ibach said. “Nebraska is the only state that does not allow legal work authorized immigrants to collect unemployment and retirement benefits that they have paid into.”The previous Feb. 10 public hearing on LB 299 drew testimony that was overwhelmingly in favor of the bill.Among those who spoke were Nebraska Dreamers, immigrants who grew up in the U.S. after being brought to this country as minors by their parents and who qualified for the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.&nbsp;Those Dreamers, under current Nebraska law, would not be able to receive unemployment benefits, despite that they work with proper authorization and that their employers are required to pay unemployment insurance taxes on their behalf.In addition to Dreamers, others&nbsp;who would benefit from LB 299 are asylum-seekers who have been granted work authorization while their requests are reviewed and those with Temporary Protected Status, which is granted when returning to a person’s home country is unsafe due to natural disaster, extraordinary conditions or war.The lone opponent who testified during the public hearing, interim Nebraska Labor Commissioner Katie Thurber, noted the now-addressed problem that had been raised by federal officials. She said more than $400 million in federal unemployment tax credits was at stake because the language was written too broadly, and reached beyond certain federal requirements.State Sen. Jane Raybould of Lincoln challenged that at the time, saying: “I find it really hard to believe that we in the state of Nebraska can not get it right like all the other 49 states have done to make sure we are in conformity.”A similar bill introduced in 2021 failed to pass into law.

Bill to open unemployment benefits to immigrant ‘Dreamers’ advances to legislative debate

New data shows Nebraska has significantly increased the number of behavioral health students and provisionally licensed providers who receive supervision in the state.

The change, which strengthens the state’s behavioral health workforce, is the result of the University of Nebraska Medical Center’s Behavioral Health Education Center of Nebraska and the American Rescue Plan (ARPA) Awards Program.

As part of their career paths, many behavioral health students and provisionally licensed trainees must spend time working with fully licensed providers to complete their coursework and licensure requirements.

A common struggle in Nebraska and other states is finding enough licensed providers to supervise students and provisionally licensed providers, said Jessie Buche, director of the ARPA Awards Program at BHECN. A major reason for this is that fully licensed providers receive little to no compensation for their time supervising students and provisionally licensed providers, she said.

“Lack of compensation has caused many licensed providers in Nebraska to forgo being supervisors because they need to take time away from their practices,” Buche said. “This historically made it difficult to help students find needed internships and created barriers to provisionally licensed providers achieving full licensure.”

A lack of supervision was identified as a major contributor to Nebraska’s behavioral health workforce shortage, and thus an entire category of ARPA funding was dedicated to addressing this issue, said BHECN Director Marley Doyle, MD.&nbsp;

The ARPA Awards Program formed after the Nebraska Legislature charged BHECN with distributing pandemic recovery funds to address key behavioral health issues. Through the program, 19 organizations in Nebraska received funding to support supervision. The organizations have done this by using the funds to compensate supervisors’ time, pay supervisees and offset costs for testing materials and other licensure needs.

Organizations receiving support to bolster supervision increased the total number of supervisees from 97 to 174, representing a 79% increase after one year of the BHECN-ARPA Awards Program.

A closer look at specific behavioral health professions showed that ARPA support allowed for a 206% increase in the number of mental health counseling supervisees, a 100% increase in social work supervisees, and a 50% increase in drug and alcohol supervisees among award recipients.

“These data illustrate how the Legislature displayed tremendous wisdom in investing in behavioral health,” Dr. Doyle said. “Our evaluations indicate that ARPA dollars are already having a powerful impact in this area after just one year of funding, and this has major implications for those who receive behavioral health services throughout our state.”

The evaluation data also show that financial support from the ARPA awards reduced barriers that previously kept awardees from providing more supervision, said Melissa Tibbits, PhD, assistant director of evaluation at BHECN.

“Many providers indicated that they are more willing and able to provide supervision thanks to the financial support they received from the awards,” Dr. Tibbits said. “This kind of financial support really can have an impact on removing barriers to grow our behavioral health workforce.”

Conversations with awardees have illustrated that ARPA supervision dollars are helping Nebraska providers recruit and retain behavioral health professionals, which directly address the state’s workforce shortage, while also helping supervisors experience the benefits and learning that come from providing supervision, Buche said.

“The benefits that come from this investment in supervision are manyfold,” Buche said. It’s been very rewarding to see our awardees have such powerful experiences while they simultaneously help us strengthen Nebraska’s behavioral health workforce.”

<a href="https://www.unmc.edu/bhecn/arpa/index.html" target="_blank">Learn more about the BHECN-ARPA Awards Program.</a>

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1741623512630.jpeg" alt="Jessica Buche (Courtesy UNMC)" />
 <figcaption>Jessica Buche (Courtesy UNMC)</figcaption>
 </figure>UNMCNew data shows Nebraska has significantly increased the number of behavioral health students and provisionally licensed providers who receive supervision in the state.The change, which strengthens the state’s behavioral health workforce, is the result of the University of Nebraska Medical Center’s Behavioral Health Education Center of Nebraska and the American Rescue Plan (ARPA) Awards Program.As part of their career paths, many behavioral health students and provisionally licensed trainees must spend time working with fully licensed providers to complete their coursework and licensure requirements.A common struggle in Nebraska and other states is finding enough licensed providers to supervise students and provisionally licensed providers, said Jessie Buche, director of the ARPA Awards Program at BHECN. A major reason for this is that fully licensed providers receive little to no compensation for their time supervising students and provisionally licensed providers, she said.“Lack of compensation has caused many licensed providers in Nebraska to forgo being supervisors because they need to take time away from their practices,” Buche said. “This historically made it difficult to help students find needed internships and created barriers to provisionally licensed providers achieving full licensure.”A lack of supervision was identified as a major contributor to Nebraska’s behavioral health workforce shortage, and thus an entire category of ARPA funding was dedicated to addressing this issue, said BHECN Director Marley Doyle, MD.&nbsp;The ARPA Awards Program formed after the Nebraska Legislature charged BHECN with distributing pandemic recovery funds to address key behavioral health issues. Through the program, 19 organizations in Nebraska received funding to support supervision. The organizations have done this by using the funds to compensate supervisors’ time, pay supervisees and offset costs for testing materials and other licensure needs.Organizations receiving support to bolster supervision increased the total number of supervisees from 97 to 174, representing a 79% increase after one year of the BHECN-ARPA Awards Program.A closer look at specific behavioral health professions showed that ARPA support allowed for a 206% increase in the number of mental health counseling supervisees, a 100% increase in social work supervisees, and a 50% increase in drug and alcohol supervisees among award recipients.“These data illustrate how the Legislature displayed tremendous wisdom in investing in behavioral health,” Dr. Doyle said. “Our evaluations indicate that ARPA dollars are already having a powerful impact in this area after just one year of funding, and this has major implications for those who receive behavioral health services throughout our state.”The evaluation data also show that financial support from the ARPA awards reduced barriers that previously kept awardees from providing more supervision, said Melissa Tibbits, PhD, assistant director of evaluation at BHECN.“Many providers indicated that they are more willing and able to provide supervision thanks to the financial support they received from the awards,” Dr. Tibbits said. “This kind of financial support really can have an impact on removing barriers to grow our behavioral health workforce.”Conversations with awardees have illustrated that ARPA supervision dollars are helping Nebraska providers recruit and retain behavioral health professionals, which directly address the state’s workforce shortage, while also helping supervisors experience the benefits and learning that come from providing supervision, Buche said.“The benefits that come from this investment in supervision are manyfold,” Buche said. It’s been very rewarding to see our awardees have such powerful experiences while they simultaneously help us strengthen Nebraska’s behavioral health workforce.”<a href="https://www.unmc.edu/bhecn/arpa/index.html" target="_blank">Learn more about the BHECN-ARPA Awards Program.</a>

BHECN-ARPA support having big impact in key workforce area of supervision

WASHINGTON— On Monday, U.S. Customs and Border Protection announced the public-facing mobile application, CBP Home. The application has a new feature – Intent to Depart – which offers unlawfully present aliens or those aliens whose parole has been revoked an orderly and defined voluntary process to notify the U.S. Government of their intent to depart the United States. This new feature is a necessary tool to comply with the President’s Executive Order 14159, Protecting the American People Against Invasion.

With the CBP Home Mobile Application, travelers, businesses, and stakeholders will continue to gain access to a single digital solution that streamlines CBP processes, enhances security, and reduces administrative burdens – all from the convenience of a mobile device.&nbsp;

&nbsp;“CBP Home App strengthens our mission to secure the U.S. border by ensuring lawful entry for travelers and supporting effective enforcement,” said Pete Flores, Acting Commissioner, U.S Customs and Border Protection. “The app provides illegal aliens in the United States with a straightforward way to declare their intent to voluntarily depart, offering them the chance to leave before facing harsher consequences. This reinforces our commitment to enforcing U.S. laws and safeguarding national security.”

CBP Home App is a free mobile application available for download by any individual on an Apple or Android device via Apple’s App Store and Google Play, as well from the CBP website.

For more information,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cbp.gov/about/mobile-apps-directory/CBPHome">visit the CBP Home webpage</a>.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1741624392845.png" alt="Image Homeland Security" />
 <figcaption>Image Homeland Security</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON— On Monday, U.S. Customs and Border Protection announced the public-facing mobile application, CBP Home. The application has a new feature – Intent to Depart – which offers unlawfully present aliens or those aliens whose parole has been revoked an orderly and defined voluntary process to notify the U.S. Government of their intent to depart the United States. This new feature is a necessary tool to comply with the President’s Executive Order 14159, Protecting the American People Against Invasion.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Today we&#39;re introducing the CBP Home app offering a new critical feature, Intent to Depart. This update complies with <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a>&#39;s Executive Order 14159, Protecting the American People Against Invasion. More Info ➡️ <a href="https://t.co/SStp1ZGI8L">https://t.co/SStp1ZGI8L</a> <a href="https://t.co/yIJl2cdetj">pic.twitter.com/yIJl2cdetj</a>&mdash; CBP (@CBP) <a href="https://twitter.com/CBP/status/1899150187240591689?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 10, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>With the CBP Home Mobile Application, travelers, businesses, and stakeholders will continue to gain access to a single digital solution that streamlines CBP processes, enhances security, and reduces administrative burdens – all from the convenience of a mobile device.&nbsp;&nbsp;“CBP Home App strengthens our mission to secure the U.S. border by ensuring lawful entry for travelers and supporting effective enforcement,” said Pete Flores, Acting Commissioner, U.S Customs and Border Protection. “The app provides illegal aliens in the United States with a straightforward way to declare their intent to voluntarily depart, offering them the chance to leave before facing harsher consequences. This reinforces our commitment to enforcing U.S. laws and safeguarding national security.”Other functions include:<ul>
 <li>I-94: Apply for and pay for an I-94 up to seven days before arriving in the United States&nbsp;</li><li>Inspection appointments: Request inspections for perishable cargo entering the United States&nbsp;</li><li>Border wait times: Check wait times at the border&nbsp;</li><li>Bus Manifest: Submit a manifest for bus operators</li>
 </ul>CBP Home App is a free mobile application available for download by any individual on an Apple or Android device via Apple’s App Store and Google Play, as well from the CBP website.For more information,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cbp.gov/about/mobile-apps-directory/CBPHome">visit the CBP Home webpage</a>.

DHS  launches new app to encourage illegals to self-deport

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/10/bill-to-catalog-nebraska-school-tools-of-mass-surveillance-hits-roadblock/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — A state lawmaker’s attempt to publicly catalog “tools of mass surveillance” in Nebraska public school districts is on pause, at least for now, as she finds an alternate path forward.

<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59450&amp;docnum=LB31&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 31</a>, from State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln, would require all of Nebraska’s 245 public school districts to&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/02/06/nebraska-bills-to-catalog-school-mass-surveillance-tools-library-books-advance-from-ed-committee/">publicly inventory and catalog student surveillance, monitoring and tracking technology tools</a>&nbsp;used by or contracted for use in each district. The bill was debated Feb. 21 and Feb. 24 before not returning to the legislative agenda, at Conrad’s request.

Conrad has pledged to find a path forward for her bill with some bipartisan support, such as through a different bill or by working with the State Board of Education, the Nebraska Department of Education or specific school districts.

The bill faced stiff opposition from some senators who feared the bill could require schools to disclose sensitive information or impose unfunded burdens to compile the necessary information.

Conrad, a past executive director of the ACLU of Nebraska, described the bill as a “simple transparency measure” that wouldn’t ban the technology she said was coming from “big tech.”

Instead, she argued that the bill could lead to cost savings over time, possibly leading to increased teacher salaries. Conrad repeatedly marked her bill as a “true right-left coalition” that she, a pragmatic progressive, had built with students, parents and taxpayers.&nbsp;

Some conservatives, in written comments for the bill, noted they’ve rarely been on the same side as the Lincoln Democrat but identified the bill as a top priority. Supportive testifiers at the hearing for the bill included Sue Greenwald of Kearney, a prominent conservative advocate for parents’ rights bills.

“If they don’t have information to know what tools of surveillance or data collection or survey are being utilized by their schools, they cannot insert and understand and be empowered to utilize that control,” Conrad said of families during debate.

State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil, chair of the Education Committee, which advanced LB 31 with no opposition, said he has put an extra emphasis on parental rights in his three years as chair. He said Conrad’s bill advanced those efforts.

“Parents should, and deserve, to be put in the driver’s seat of their child’s education,” Murman said. “Senator Conrad has brought a way to give parents some more information and transparency without putting too much of an additional burden on the work that our great schools have to do.”

State Board of Education members Lisa Schonhoff of Bennington and Kirk Penner of Aurora have also voiced favor for LB 31. Schonhoff&nbsp;<a href="https://x.com/LSchonhoff4NE/status/1894403887446077816" target="_blank">thanked Conrad</a>&nbsp;for “being on the side of parents.”

“This is a nonpartisan, common sense bill,” she wrote in a Feb. 25 post on X, formerly Twitter.

Many senators who ultimately opposed the legislation said they agreed with Conrad’s goal that schools should not be collecting data on students and selling it.

However, State Sen. Brad von Gillern of the Elkhorn area noted the bill received opposition from major organizations, such as the Nebraska Council of School Administrators, Schools Taking Action for Nebraska Children’s Education, Greater Nebraska Schools Association, Nebraska Rural Community Schools Association and the Nebraska State Education Association.

“I believe it’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing,” von Gillern said. “It’s a Trojan horse to carry things forward that we do not want to advance in our school systems.”

LB 31 would require the State Board of Education to draft a model policy around the targeted technology, requiring school districts to disclose certain information about the tools.

State Sen. Bob Hallstrom of Syracuse offered an amendment to make the surveillance tool inventory voluntary and not require it to be posted online.&nbsp;

He similarly pushed back on a finding in the bill stipulating that schools were using the “tools of mass surveillance … under the guise of advancing security or efficiency goals.”

“I think it’s offensive to suggest that the schools would be doing that under some type of guise,” Hallstrom said. “They truly do have the best interest in the safety of the students at heart.”

Von Gillern repeatedly asked whether the bill could require public disclosure of sensitive security details that someone plotting a “nefarious act” could use. He said gathering data for the protection of students and staff is a “worthwhile venture” but that Conrad’s bill, portrayed as advancing that goal, could do “exactly the opposite.”

State Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward said digital cameras, for example, can help when students offer differing stories after incidents. But she voiced similar concerns as von Gillern that disclosing specific technology vendor names and contact information could be dangerous.

Conrad said the plain language of her bill would not require any publication of sensitive information but that she could clarify that intention if needed. Von Gillern said senators also need to consider what isn’t in the bill but that many districts had voiced concerns about.

“If we do anything to deteriorate the security of our children in schools then shame on us,” von Gillern said.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1741623329199.jpeg" alt="State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln. Jan. 8, 2025 (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)" />
 <figcaption>State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln. Jan. 8, 2025 (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)</figcaption>
 </figure>Zach Wendling<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/03/10/bill-to-catalog-nebraska-school-tools-of-mass-surveillance-hits-roadblock/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — A state lawmaker’s attempt to publicly catalog “tools of mass surveillance” in Nebraska public school districts is on pause, at least for now, as she finds an alternate path forward.<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=59450&amp;docnum=LB31&amp;leg=109" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 31</a>, from State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln, would require all of Nebraska’s 245 public school districts to&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2025/02/06/nebraska-bills-to-catalog-school-mass-surveillance-tools-library-books-advance-from-ed-committee/">publicly inventory and catalog student surveillance, monitoring and tracking technology tools</a>&nbsp;used by or contracted for use in each district. The bill was debated Feb. 21 and Feb. 24 before not returning to the legislative agenda, at Conrad’s request.Conrad has pledged to find a path forward for her bill with some bipartisan support, such as through a different bill or by working with the State Board of Education, the Nebraska Department of Education or specific school districts.The bill faced stiff opposition from some senators who feared the bill could require schools to disclose sensitive information or impose unfunded burdens to compile the necessary information.<h2>Civil rights and transparency</h2>Conrad, a past executive director of the ACLU of Nebraska, described the bill as a “simple transparency measure” that wouldn’t ban the technology she said was coming from “big tech.”Instead, she argued that the bill could lead to cost savings over time, possibly leading to increased teacher salaries. Conrad repeatedly marked her bill as a “true right-left coalition” that she, a pragmatic progressive, had built with students, parents and taxpayers.&nbsp;Some conservatives, in written comments for the bill, noted they’ve rarely been on the same side as the Lincoln Democrat but identified the bill as a top priority. Supportive testifiers at the hearing for the bill included Sue Greenwald of Kearney, a prominent conservative advocate for parents’ rights bills.“If they don’t have information to know what tools of surveillance or data collection or survey are being utilized by their schools, they cannot insert and understand and be empowered to utilize that control,” Conrad said of families during debate.State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil, chair of the Education Committee, which advanced LB 31 with no opposition, said he has put an extra emphasis on parental rights in his three years as chair. He said Conrad’s bill advanced those efforts.“Parents should, and deserve, to be put in the driver’s seat of their child’s education,” Murman said. “Senator Conrad has brought a way to give parents some more information and transparency without putting too much of an additional burden on the work that our great schools have to do.”State Board of Education members Lisa Schonhoff of Bennington and Kirk Penner of Aurora have also voiced favor for LB 31. Schonhoff&nbsp;<a href="https://x.com/LSchonhoff4NE/status/1894403887446077816" target="_blank">thanked Conrad</a>&nbsp;for “being on the side of parents.”“This is a nonpartisan, common sense bill,” she wrote in a Feb. 25 post on X, formerly Twitter.<h2>‘A wolf in sheep’s clothing’</h2>Many senators who ultimately opposed the legislation said they agreed with Conrad’s goal that schools should not be collecting data on students and selling it.However, State Sen. Brad von Gillern of the Elkhorn area noted the bill received opposition from major organizations, such as the Nebraska Council of School Administrators, Schools Taking Action for Nebraska Children’s Education, Greater Nebraska Schools Association, Nebraska Rural Community Schools Association and the Nebraska State Education Association.“I believe it’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing,” von Gillern said. “It’s a Trojan horse to carry things forward that we do not want to advance in our school systems.”LB 31 would require the State Board of Education to draft a model policy around the targeted technology, requiring school districts to disclose certain information about the tools.State Sen. Bob Hallstrom of Syracuse offered an amendment to make the surveillance tool inventory voluntary and not require it to be posted online.&nbsp;He similarly pushed back on a finding in the bill stipulating that schools were using the “tools of mass surveillance … under the guise of advancing security or efficiency goals.”“I think it’s offensive to suggest that the schools would be doing that under some type of guise,” Hallstrom said. “They truly do have the best interest in the safety of the students at heart.”<h2>School safety and security</h2>Von Gillern repeatedly asked whether the bill could require public disclosure of sensitive security details that someone plotting a “nefarious act” could use. He said gathering data for the protection of students and staff is a “worthwhile venture” but that Conrad’s bill, portrayed as advancing that goal, could do “exactly the opposite.”State Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward said digital cameras, for example, can help when students offer differing stories after incidents. But she voiced similar concerns as von Gillern that disclosing specific technology vendor names and contact information could be dangerous.Conrad said the plain language of her bill would not require any publication of sensitive information but that she could clarify that intention if needed. Von Gillern said senators also need to consider what isn’t in the bill but that many districts had voiced concerns about.“If we do anything to deteriorate the security of our children in schools then shame on us,” von Gillern said.State Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha said that suggesting Conrad’s bill could reduce school safety was a “ridiculous and absurd extrapolation to arrive at.”Hunt said if that was the true concern, she said von Gillern and others should maybe “lift a finger” on gun safe storage or other safety regulations, or increase mental health support.“All this does is put on the books that this is our expectation in Nebraska,” Hunt said. “That our kids are not the product, that we’re not selling our kids’ information, and that we have transparency around the process.”<h2>Lawmakers reject ‘stylistic changes’</h2>State Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha said it shouldn’t be “too cumbersome” to tell parents whether their children’s data is being sold.State Sen. Kathleen Kauth of the Millard area said she agreed with the aim of the bill and supported it, but she also wanted some guardrails in place, such as possibly exempting physical security information.Lawmakers signaled they might be moving away from Conrad’s goals after voting 27-16 against “stylistic changes” in an amendment she offered, largely focused on small tweaks in the bill that opponents had pointed out. Kauth and Hughes were the only Republicans to support those changes.Lawmakers had not yet gotten to a vote on Hallstrom’s amendment or LB 31 overall.Hughes said many school districts have technology vendors sign a student data privacy agreement explicitly saying what will happen with the data. She suggested making such agreements a requirement, to help in the case of data hacks or breaches.<h2>Conrad vows to continue fight</h2>State Sen. Terrell McKinney of Omaha agreed with Conrad about the ease of implementing the bill. He said, “It’s always too much work when you should just do the right thing.”“This should be simple, unless there’s like a million surveillance tools they’re using, and student surveys they’re using, or they, like, got some double oh seven, I Spy, MI6 type of stuff going on,” he said.State Sen. Bob Andersen, whose Sarpy County district includes Gretna Public Schools, read a letter from his superintendent questioning a lack of definitions in the bill, such as “tracking system” or what tools are of “legitimate use,” could lead to subjectivity in implementing the bill.Conrad repeatedly pushed back on her colleagues and told them to not use “straw man” or “red herring” arguments and not to get “toiled up in personal battles or misinformation.”She told her colleagues that, if needed, she would step out of the way.“Friends, if the problem is perhaps me or you don’t like my politics, or you’re upset about my work on other bills, I understand that, and I will work if need be to find a substitute sponsor for this legislation because I don’t care to get the credit,” Conrad said. “I care that this important issue moves forward.”<h2>School ‘tools of mass surveillance’ disclosures proposed under Legislative Bill 31 (2025)</h2><ul>
 <li>The name and contact information for each private company, vendor or governmental entity providing such technology.</li><li>The cost to purchase or maintain each surveillance, monitoring or tracking tool.</li><li>A description of each tool, including privacy protection measures and data collection or sharing and usage activities.</li><li>Whether a parent can opt their child out of being subjected to the tool.</li><li>If and how the collected data will be shared with law enforcement or implicate punitive actions under the state’s Student Discipline Act.</li><li>How such tools ensure proper accommodation for students with disabilities or individualized education programs.</li><li>How biometric or personally identifiable information is stored, shared or sold with the entity providing such tools.</li><li>Clearly delineate what remedies are available to students and parents for possible privacy violations related to the tools, including the state’s Consumer Protection Act and the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act (to possibly sue schools).</li>
 </ul>