The hustle and bustle of Nebraska’s political scene has seen some of its esteemed senators labouring tirelessly to secure $18 million in federal funds. Their aim? To expand a summer grocery benefit for low-income families, a pursuit undeterred by Governor Jim Pillen’s recent refusal of the funds. Their solution? A bill that mandates the state human services agency to seek additional funding through the Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) program, earmarked for providing an extra $40 a month for three months next summer to families in need.
State Sen. Jen Day of Gretna remains steadfast in the face of challenges, proclaiming, “It’s still open to us.” This unwavering belief in overcoming the previously stipulated Jan. 1 deadline for states to opt into the summer food program has inspired hope in the hearts of those championing Legislative Bill 952, who are fervently rallying for an expanded grocery benefit.
The Summer EBT programme, which originated during the COVID-19 pandemic to combat the rising spectre of food insecurity among low-income families, was officially enshrined by Congress last year. In contrast, Pillen administration officials argue that the pandemic has passed and assert that pandemic-era programmes should come to an end. Nevertheless, advocates call attention to the fact that an existing summer food program may not be accessible to all kids and may have dwindled in recent years.
In the midst of their march for federal funding, a myriad of other bills were introduced, encompassing subjects such as a new execution method, regulation of kratom use, the demolition of the State Penitentiary, the substitution of county attorneys with multi-county “district attorneys,” and the provision of special education teacher loans.
These proposals ran the gamut, ranging from endorsing “nitrogen hypoxia” as a means to enact the death penalty in Nebraska, to classifying kratom—an herbal product—as a controlled substance. Furthermore, there were suggestions to raze the State Penitentiary and replace county attorneys with “district attorneys” serving multiple counties, in response to the dearth of special education teachers in K-12 schools.
The commitment of these state senators to bring about change in various aspects of Nebraska’s social and educational systems is evident. It will certainly be riveting to witness the evolution of these proposals through the legislative process. Irrespective of the outcome, their exertions mirror a deep-seated devotion to addressing the needs of their communities and the broader populace. Time will tell if these senators can actualize the change they envision for the people of Nebraska.
