LINCOLN -- An attempt to reverse a veto on a bill that would expand food stamp eligibility for certain drug offenders failed Monday when seven previous supporters flipped their votes.
The Nebraska Legislature passed Legislative Bill 319 last week on a 32-17 vote, but it was immediately vetoed by Gov. Jim Pillen. The introducer's motion to override Pillen's veto was rejected in a 24-24 vote, six votes shy of the 30 it needed to succeed.
State Sen. Victor Rountree of Bellevue introduced LB 319 to lift an exemption that prevents individuals formerly incarcerated for drug distribution felonies or with three or more felony convictions for drug possession from receiving Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) funds -- also known as food stamps. Rountree estimated this would benefit more than 1,000 Nebraskans.
This would have put Nebraska in alignment with 26 other states that also opted out of the national lifetime ban. Nebraska currently offers a smaller exemption for people with two or fewer felony convictions.
Pillen argued the bill was too lenient on the treatment component and should not include people convicted of dealing drugs.
"Drug dealers should not be entitled to taxpayer-funded benefits, like SNAP," Pillen said in a press release following Monday's vote. "We can't let repeat felons take advantage of the system."
The bill earned cross-party support at each round of debate, and Rountree amended the bill to include a drug treatment component. People with three or more felony convictions would have to have completed or be participating in a treatment program. A doctor could also attest that the treatment isn't necessary.
That amendment was enough to maintain Republican Sen. Mike Jacobson of North Platte's support for the bill Monday, saying he wanted to keep his word to Rountree. He urged other lawmakers to better their understanding of drug addictions, saying his education on the issue also contributed to his support for LB 319.
Supporters largely argued that expanding SNAP would reduce recidivism and promote public safety by reducing barriers to re-entry. Sen. Wendy DeBoer of Bennington framed the debate as a moral argument.
"If someone is hungry and they don't have a reliable source of food, I'm going to give them food every time," DeBoer said. "It's food. I'm not going to use withholding food as a punishment."
Opponents to LB 319 argued food stamp services are not needed. Sen. Bob Andersen of Omaha argued food insecurity is an issue best solved by charities, churches or a number of other organizations that help "criminals" transition back into society. Sen. Tony Sorrentino of the Omaha area, another opponent, said his issue with the bill is that it ignored victims of drug crimes.
"It's as if this body has an allergy to the word, 'victim,'" Sorrentino said.
Sen. Dan Quick of Grand Island disputed that Sorrentino's argument only applies to drug distribution offenses. Sen. George Dungan of Lincoln noted that people can lose their eligibility for small drug possession charges, as individuals can earn felony charges for as little as drug residue.
Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha further argued that being ineligible for SNAP was not part of any offender's sentence, and said that by rejecting the veto override, the Legislature is effectively passing down further punishment on those individuals.
While Sorrentino and Andersen were open in their opposition to LB 319 before Monday, seven senators -- all Republicans -- switched their votes from a "yes" during the bill's final round of floor debate last week to a "no" on the veto override.
Those lawmakers were Sens. Christy Armendariz of Omaha, Stanley Clouse of Kearney, Robert Dover of Norfolk, Glen Meyer of Pender, Mike Moser of Columbus, Rita Sanders of Bellevue, and Brad von Gillern of the Omaha area.
Sanders and Armendariz said they were always iffy in their support for LB 319. Armendariz said she preferred the bill limit the exemption to people 65 and older, and said she only supported the bill last week because it already had enough support to pass. Sanders said she reconsidered her position after hearing more feedback from her constituents.
Von Gillern, who supported LB 319 through each round of debate until Monday, said he changed his mind after he got a better understanding about the options available to former drug offenders.
Sen. John Fredrickson of Omaha questioned the mindset of senators who flipped. He speculated that the only reason why someone would change their vote is that they didn't believe in the policy in the first place, or they flipped out of fear for political repercussions. Both reasons he found to be problematic.
"If it was the right policy then, it's the right policy now," Fredrickson said.
Rountree said he was disappointed in Monday's vote, but he was grateful for the support the bill received. He said he plans to bring the bill back in future sessions, and will regroup with other supporters on the best approach during the interim.
"No one benefits from this vote," ACLU of Nebraska Executive Director Mindy Rush Chipman said in a press release. "The SNAP ban will keep making life harder for struggling Nebraskans, adding food insecurity to the mix of collateral consequences that are already hurting them and their families long after their sentence ended. Meanwhile, all Nebraskans will continue to feel the impacts of a state that continues to choose punishment over people."
World-Herald staff writer Josh Reyes contributed to this report.
Government-politics Nebraska governor vetoes SNAP expansion, considers bans on lab-grown meat, cellphones in schools Josh Reyes Government-politics Effort to water down Nebraska minimum wage law fails; lawmakers scramble to resurrect bill Erin Bamer Government-politics Nebraska Legislature approves $11.1 billion state budget for the next two years Erin Bamer Our best Omaha staff photos & videos of May 2025