2008
Week 12
March 29, 2008

Hi

“Do we know what we are doing?” That is often the plaintive cry of senators who are on the losing side of a vote. We had a lot of split votes this week!

If you really cannot muster cogent arguments against a bill you do not like, cast doubt. It often works. A week ago, three speakers in a row said words like: I just do not feel good about this. I cannot quite put my finger on it. My gut read -- this is bad legislation. This is very poorly crafted wording (no correcting amendments). And: this is so complicated in relation to all the other parts of law -- no one here can possibly understand it. Can you go home and explain every detail to your constituents??? (Using quote marks requires a cut and paste on each quote, so I am using as few as possible. Get over it! Ha.)

Well, hello. We have a committee system. Committee staff members are responsible for a thorough study of all relevant statutes, providing correcting amendments and good information to the committee members. Lengthy small group debates help senators ask probing questions. When it gets to the floor, we have free range to ask questions and make amendments. For a senator to act like this is too complex to handle is a cop out. I have become a so-called expert on hundreds of subjects I never thought about before becoming a senator. On the floor, you are immersed in a subject for a few hours, vote what makes sense from a citizens point of view, and move on.

We did just that this week, hour after hour. Should an abandoned cemetery become the responsibility of the county? When? Who pays for mowing? What is the financial limit? We came to a decision on a subject I have never heard discussed before. There was a hearing, of course, in which all affected parties could state their preferences. Change.

We passed three major budget bills. My committee worked day after day on each part of it, talking with agencies, citizens, fiscal analysts. Then, someone on the floor says he does not understand how every part works. We answer his questions, but he continues to express doubts without more specifics. My silent advice to the man is to get over it. Perhaps I have been there too long. Hmmmm.

More background -- on what we are thinking as we make split decisions -- can be illustrated with the testing bill. Nebraska is the only state which has each local school create its own tests of students. It is a good system, especially because the teacher can then measure progress for each student, which is after all the point of education. However, it is difficult and expensive, as it takes a great amount of teacher time (and overtime!)

We have argued about this for five years, since the federally-mandated No Child Left Behind required us to compare schools. That is good and an incentive to teachers. Right? Yes. That is bad, because the major differences between schools relate to the factors of low income families, the number of those who do not speak English (we have over 50 languages in Omaha), and the community attitude toward quality schooling. Right? Yes. Actually, both are correct. It is up to us to decide what is right.

We are deciding that it is time to move on, join the rest of the states, but hold on to the gains we have made with local incentives to measure each student' s progress.

Another split is on generating electricity with wind turbines. We all know that we have to develop this option, that wind tech pollutes less, that it costs more now but will be cost effective in the future. The power companies have been a pain in some part of the anatomy, acting like it cannot be done. Surprise. One announced this winter it is going to do it. Big time. Will become cost effective, they say. Another is asking us to legislate that wind turbines cannot be large enough to operate a farmstead. Hello? Again, move on. Change has come while you are grumping. This is a good example of the value of a state legislature. We can move up the timeline on change. Without a vote of the people we can still represent the people's interest.

Another is the Preferred Prescription Drug list. In it, a state skims off the prescription drugs which are costing us the most for Medicaid patients and puts them out for bid. Will save millions of dollars. Right away you have the question about the unusual drug my mother is using for cancer. Answer: all drugs will continue to be prescribed, but we are making a list of the more popular ones in order to get a lower cost on those.

The questions on the floor are good: how will a doctor use this, how can we predict how much this will save, how can we be sure every patient gets quality care, how can we be sure a doctor will not be intimidated into using the wrong drug, etc.??? Fine. But then we get the plaintive voice that this is all very confusing and how can we possibly pass this bill until every person on the floor fully understands what will happen? O my.

The vote will be split, but will pass because most of us understand that no one will ever know how every someone out there will respond until we do it. We act on faith, based on the best data we have. Plus, we can tweak it in the future.

What passed the controversial cloning legislation? My vote was positive because all sides said they could live with it and, far more important, would not bring the subject back for several years. Please. Yes. The issue is used for fund raising by groups, not for light.

My DUI bill hit a roadblock in committee. The goal is to reduce the number of intoxicated persons who drive a vehicle from a bar. The committee looks at the details.

Summary: one big lesson I have learned in eight years on the floor is that there comes a time to take a deep breath, ignore the shouting, and do what I consider to be the right thing. Then give a pat on the head to anyone still hyperventilating.

A fun quote from email: We need our own guns to protect ourselves from politicians.

Another with more meat: The label of fiscal conservative does not always translate to fiscal responsibility.

May we learn from the split votes in our lives.

Lowen