Immigration enforcement, health measures like mask mandates, and in-state tuition for DACA recipients were the focus of attention in the Legislature Monday.
Leading off the day, Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh lamented the latest killing of a protestor by immigration agents in Minneapolis. She said her heart is breaking for the nation, which she said has reached an inflection point. And she urged people to reexamine their support for President Donald Trump’s policies:
“What are we doing to stand up in this moment, and how are we showing up for each other, for our community, for our loved ones? I’ve seen this repeated over and over again on social media: It doesn’t matter if you voted for this person. It doesn’t matter if you agreed at some point in time, it’s okay to say you no longer agree with what is happening,” Cavanaugh said.
Sen. Jane Raybould said Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents should stand down, but disagreed with those who want to defund the agency.
“I do not support defunding ICE. I actually think that ICE needs all the funding they can, to go through a retraining process on de-escalation, on how to deal with individuals who are peacefully protesting. That’s our right,” Raybould said.
And Cavanaugh urged her fellow state senators to speak up.
“It is not okay for people who are showing up and documenting atrocities to be gunned down on the streets by pseudo-law enforcement, and it is not okay to be complicit and quiet about it. We have a platform — all 49 of us — and we should be using it,” she said.
Sens. Wendy DeBoer and Terrell McKinney also voiced their concerns, but others did not speak on the topic, which was not on the agenda. Cavanaugh, Raybould, DeBoer and McKinney are all Democrats in the officially nonpartisan Legislature.
Also Monday, lawmakers advanced a bill (LB203) that would require elected officials to approve before certain “directed health measures” could be imposed by county or regional health departments. Sen. Kathleen Kauth, who sponsored the bill, has said it is intended to increase accountability, by holding elected officials, not unelected health directors, responsible for decisions like the mask mandates imposed in some districts during the COVID pandemic.
Sen. Raybould, who chaired the Lincoln city council at the time, opposed the bill, praising the steps taken by the Lincoln-Lancaster County Health Department during the pandemic.
“I couldn’t be prouder of how Lincoln Lancaster County modeled the best science practices in combating a new, unknown virus. Lancaster County had the lowest loss of life per capita in our state of Nebraska. As unpopular as it was to have mandatory mask requirements, space, distancing, hand sanitizers, hand washing and limits on crowd sizes and protective gloves and plexiglass screening and COVID testing, each measure worked and protected folks,” she said.
The bill contains an exception allowing health departments to implement measures if there is an epidemiological link by which an individual may have been exposed to a communicable disease – for example, shutting down a restaurant linked to an outbreak of illnesses. But Kauth said that exception would not have allowed a district-wide mask mandate.
Under an amendment offered by Sen. John Fredrickson, the elected officials who have to approve measures could do so in a virtual meeting. Sen. Brian Hardin, chair of the Health and Human Services Committee, called the measure a compromise.
“On the one extreme, not to have public health people make decisions for an entire society without accountability, and at the same time, try to create something that is functional,” Hardin said.
And Kauth described how she wants health measures determined. “You can’t just say, ‘Everybody mask up. Everybody do this.’ If you’re going to have that kind of a reaction, you have to have the elected members say, ‘Yes, okay, we’ll listen to you, we’ll take your expert advice into consideration. We’ll make the decision, and then give you that power,’” Kauth said.
Senators then voted 28-13 to give the bill first-round approval.
Monday afternoon, the Education Committee heard proposals (LB870 and LB1061) to repeal a law passed in 2006 that authorizes in-state tuition for DACA recipients – young people brought into the country illegally – who graduated from Nebraska high schools. Education Committee chairman Sen. Dave Murman, sponsor of one of the proposals, said it fits with the times.
“In national political conversations, perhaps right now, no topic is bigger than addressing immigration, with more and more Americans demanding laws that prioritize legal American citizens first. In fact, it is likely because of the public’s opinion on this topic, that today, President Trump is back in the White House. In light of these conversations, I think it’s time to reexamine that law and repeal this 20-year-old mistake,” Murman said.
Murman also argued the proposals would save taxpayers money that would otherwise be spent subsidizing in-state tuition.
Lucia Pedroza Estrada of Inclusive Communities, which offers scholarships to immigrant students, said changing the law would harm the state’s economy by increasing the “brain drain” of young people leaving Nebraska.
“You cannot claim to want to retain Nebraska talent while pushing educated, work-ready young people out. We’re not protecting Nebraska’s future. We’re actively undermining it,” Pedroza Estrada said.
The committee took no immediate action on the proposals.