Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee
February 12, 2025
Committee Chair: Sen. Rita Sanders | Bills Heard: 4 | Full Transcript (PDF)
LB664: Allow public comment and regulatory challenges in locations outside Lancaster County
Introduced by: Sen. Tanya Storer | Testimony: 3 proponents, 0 opponents, 0 neutral | Read bill text (PDF)
Storer's LB664 would let small businesses challenge regulations closer to home, not just in Lincoln. The bill allows regulatory challenges and public comments to be filed in any district court where a business operates or owner resides, rather than requiring all cases to be heard in Lancaster County. Why it matters: Small businesses across Nebraska currently face prohibitive travel costs and legal fees to challenge state regulations in the Capitol. Storer said the current system creates "unequal access to justice" and forces mom-and-pop shops to spend resources on compliance rather than growth. What they're saying: Proponents called it "commonsense" legislation that exists in red, blue, and purple states. "Allowing those judges to interpret the law as the law is written across the state makes a lot of sense," testified Jonathan Wolfson of Cicero Action. Sen. Andersen questioned a $102,000 fiscal note, skeptical the Department of Corrections actually needs a new legislative coordinator. By the numbers: Online position comments showed 12 proponents, zero opponents, zero neutral. What's next: No vote was taken. The bill advances with committee support and may be considered as part of a broader regulatory reform package.
Committee sentiment: Supportive: Sen. Bob Andersen
Sentiment estimated from questions and comments — not stated positions.
LB565: Revoke guidance documents and provider bulletins; pause new issuance for two years
Introduced by: Sen. Dan Quick | Testimony: 4 proponents, 3 opponents, 1 neutral | Read bill text (PDF)
Quick's LB565 would revoke unfunded mandates disguised as 'guidance documents' that are crushing developmental disability providers. The bill targets provider bulletins issued by DHHS that impose new requirements without public comment, formal rulemaking, or funding. Providers cite a no-bid training monopoly, mandatory NPI numbers for high school volunteers, and a zero-tolerance Electronic Visit Verification policy stricter than federal standards. Why it matters: Developmental disability providers already face severe staffing shortages and razor-thin profit margins. Instead of funding solutions, DHHS is piling on administrative mandates that divert resources from direct care. One provider said the state's own conversation with providers reduced EVV errors from 25% to 7%—proof that dialogue works better than edicts. What they're saying: Proponents: "This bill does not eliminate oversight. Rather, it ensures thoughtful, measured, and responsive" regulation, said Justin Solomon of Integrated Life Choices. Opponents argue guidance documents are essential for rapid implementation of federal law changes and that formal rulemaking takes a year. Matthew Ahern, deputy Medicaid director, said bulletins allow "the specificity that we might need to implement the Medicaid program." By the numbers: Online comments: 27 proponents, 4 opponents, 1 neutral. What's next: No vote taken. Quick's amendment (AM239) would narrow the bill to developmental disability providers only, which would satisfy the Power Review Board and Attorney General's Office.
Committee sentiment: Supportive: Sen. Megan Hunt Skeptical: Sen. John Cavanaugh, Sen. Dunixi Guereca, Sen. Dan Lonowski
Sentiment estimated from questions and comments — not stated positions.
LB29: Require agencies to review regulations every three years
Introduced by: Sen. Danielle Conrad | Testimony: 4 proponents, 0 opponents, 2 neutral | Read bill text (PDF)
Conrad's LB29 would require state agencies to review all their regulations every three years—codifying what worked under Ricketts. The bill mandates that each agency designate someone to evaluate existing rules, conduct cost-benefit analysis, and report to the Legislature on what should stay, go, or change. It's modeled on Governor Ricketts' 2017 executive order that cut Nebraska's regulatory code by 25-30%. Why it matters: Without regular review, regulations sit on the books indefinitely, even when they no longer serve their purpose. Idaho found a 1960s dress code for deputy state veterinarians and rules for a lottery TV show that never aired. Codifying the process ensures it survives changes in administration. What they're saying: Proponents: "This is a really important piece of legislation that just codifies what your former governor put in place by executive order," said Jonathan Wolfson. Chambers support it as good government. Opponents: DHHS said reviewing 350 regulatory chapters in 6 months is "nearly impossible" and sought clarification on whether the bill suspends all regulations during review. By the numbers: Online comments: 3 proponents, 1 opponent, 2 neutral. Ricketts' 2017 order reduced regulations from 100,627 to 76,201 restrictions. What's next: No vote taken. Conrad said she's open to adjusting the 3-year timeline to 4 or 5 years if needed and is working constructively with the governor's office.
Committee sentiment: Skeptical: Sen. Dan Lonowski, Sen. John Cavanaugh
Sentiment estimated from questions and comments — not stated positions.
LB472: Create Office of Regulatory Management in governor's office
Introduced by: Sen. Dan McKeon | Testimony: 2 proponents, 0 opponents, 3 neutral | Read bill text (PDF)
McKeon's LB472 would create a permanent Office of Regulatory Management in the governor's office to police regulatory overreach. Modeled on Virginia's office, it would maintain a transparent catalog of all regulations, analyze cost-benefit impacts, and ensure agencies follow proper procedures. Virginia's office found $1.2 billion in annual savings. Why it matters: Executive orders on regulatory reform can disappear when administrations change. Codifying an office ensures continuity and signals that cutting red tape is a permanent priority, not a passing fad. It also gives the Legislature a central point to monitor whether agencies are following the Administrative Procedure Act. What they're saying: Proponents: Virginia's office found that municipalities could save tens of millions by testing for water contamination before building treatment plants. "Having somebody who's going to look over their shoulders" ensures cost-benefit analysis is transparent, said Jonathan Wolfson. Neutral testifiers: Insurance Federation said the bill's protection against overturning regulatory actions provides comfort. DHHS worried about time and resource demands of detailed analysis. By the numbers: Online comments: 2 proponents, 0 opponents, 1 neutral. Virginia's office has a director and three full-time employees. What's next: No vote taken. McKeon said Virginia's model shows the fiscal note claims are inflated and that benefits will far exceed costs. Willing to work with Insurance Federation on language.
Committee sentiment: Skeptical: Sen. Dan Lonowski, Sen. John Cavanaugh Unclear: Sen. Rita Sanders
Sentiment estimated from questions and comments — not stated positions.
Session Notes
The committee heard four bills focused on regulatory reform: LB664 (venue for regulatory challenges), LB565 (guidance documents and provider bulletins), LB29 (three-year regulatory review), and LB472 (Office of Regulatory Management). Multiple testifiers suggested these bills could be packaged together as a committee-prioritized regulatory omnibus. The Governor's Policy Research Office testified in neutral capacity on LB29 and LB472, expressing support for regulatory reform goals while raising fiscal note and implementation concerns. Several agencies (DHHS, Attorney General, Power Review Board) testified in opposition or neutral capacity, with some indicating willingness to withdraw opposition if bills are amended. The committee did not vote on any bills during this hearing.
Generated by NE Wire Service | Source: Nebraska Legislature Transcribers Office This is an AI-generated summary. Verify all claims against the official transcript.