2007
Week 7
February 17, 2007

Hi

When life on the floor is slow and we need a small joke of the week we will sometimes switch votes on a new senator's first bill. If the bill has had no opposition, the senator is sitting there confidently awaiting the welcoming green lights on the voting board. We all vote red and watch the poor fellow come to startled attention. He turns around to see if he has any friends. We are smiling as we switch the buttons to green. It is not much humor, but sometimes it is all we have.

Last week a new senator had an amendment. We disliked it enough we did not even debate it. He later acknowledged that when the board turned red he thought we were playing a joke on him. He was doubly dismayed when we did not switch to a pleasing green.

I had fun strangling a rabbit. It was on the smoking ban, in response to the argument that the ban compromises freedom. Strange argument, since we wll live with restrictions and breathing clean air is a basic right. So, to have a bit of fun, I said I was dismayed that I could not shoot a rabbit in my own yard, going into my flower garden (my Mother shot many a sinning rabbit.) That rabbit has more freedom than I do. If I could catch him/her I would cheerfully strangle the rascal, but then I would have the visage of Senator Chambers glaring over my shoulder. He whirled around and nodded vigorously, stating later that Senator Kruse is correct in believing that he does not have the right to shut off the breathing of a rabbit. (How about in a bar?)

The smoking ban is on hold while the two sides see if they can compromise. We have enough votes to pass it, but not enough to bring it to a vote. I noted on the floor a plain fact: if we do not pass this bill, with all of its carefully detailed exceptions, the people will bring a petition to vote and it will take no prisoners. A public petition has to be quite simple and is not subject to negotiating discussion. It would pass, big time.

Our Appropriations Committee presented our preliminary budget this week, which gives agencies some warning about what we are considering. We have looked at every budget and put down our low figure for those where we have a choice. It came to a 4.9% annual increase. We cut it back to 4.2%, to give everyone something to think about. Our next step is to hear from agencies directly and review the decisions on those who protest.

Greatly complicating the discussion is the governor's budget, which had a published 3.8% increase. It is actually 4.8% if you count the missing pieces which we are obligated to put in. School aid figures were not available when the governor's staff did their work, nor were the salary negotiations for public employees, which we must set in budget.

Over 2 of the 4.8 is for increased aid to K-12 schools. That averages about 10% per year. Or think about the $144,000 maintenance on the one new building built with private funds, which I referenced last week. Even though it has brought in over $30 million in new grants, that is new money. Comes on top of a budget. AARP pushed a prescription bill this week which would cost up to $1 million to implement but will save us about $2 million every year. Great investment. Like putting storm windows on your house. However, if you do not have the money to do it you will not realize the savings it brings.

It would be foolish to keep the budget at 4.2, because the cuts will cost us down the road. But we do foolish things in state budget to keep the public happy. To cut, we are challenging large staffs with bureaucratic cultures doing poor planning. We will bring steady savings down the road but it is slow tough work.

I will be glad when my final two years is up. We fight costs every step of the way and have saved tens of millions of dollars. But the public often states that we must like to spend. Ridiculous. Makes you want to quit trying. The next senators up to bat will have to learn what I know before they can find the efficiencies.

Dilemma of the week: how do we pay for federally mandated transportation for handicapped persons who otherwise cannot, for example, get to the doctor? The Feds give grants for purchasing Handivans and kneeling buses. The mandate is clear. In Omaha, when no van is available, the bus system is required to hire a taxi. Over 25 years ago, Nebraska ordered local governments to provide transportation to the handicapped AND to the elderly with a 50% discount in the cost. State law offers support by grants from the Department of Roads to provide up to 50% of the operating cost. The requests totaled $3 million for the first years and the state paid it.

Now the requests are $9 million and last year we paid $1.5 m. The money comes from gas tax and what the state does not pay goes on property tax, which added $42 million to Omaha taxes during the last ten years! What happened? Roads writes out the checks but no one is in charge of policy. Years ago, whoever was writing the checks was running out of money and so decided to pay 100% for the Handivans, since they are obviously for handicapped, and divide the remainder among the buses in Omaha and Lincoln. So last year the rural units received 75% of their requests and Lincoln received 4%. Omaha kicked in over $4 million from property tax to meet the deficit.

My committee deals with budgets and I have protested this inequity for six years. The committee was unanimous in support, but the governor vetoed all attempts at more funding because it would increase gas taxes one half cent if fully funded. O my.

Rural units have little interest in pushing the matter since they are not losing that much. I do not want to put everyone on the same percentage pay out as that would be devastating to rural communities where the need is genuine. However, I have threatened to do just that if everyone does not come to the table with votes. The total extra would not come from road construction, but is about what it takes to pave one mile.

So: do I give up and let it all go on property tax? Do we join forces to get the gas tax money? Do we look for another tax source? Or have bake sales? Sadly, again and again it is these kind of choices we face on how to do what is necessary when money is tight.

Cheers

Lowen