BEATRICE – Nebraska voters are a step closer to having a say in whether Nebraska’s term limits restriction for state lawmakers, should be changed.


Norfolk Senator Robert Dover’s proposed constitutional amendment, LR 19 CA…moved to final round consideration Friday, on a voice vote.


It proposes allowing voters to decide whether state senators could serve three consecutive four-year-terms, rather than the current restriction of two consecutive terms. Dover said he didn’t have a required 40 votes to place the issue on a primary ballot….and he proposed an amendment to return it to a general election vote, only.

As for increasing to three terms…Dover said, "When I got down to the legislature I realized that going to two terms, significantly...I think, somewhat devastated the institutional knowledge of the senators here. So, my initial bill was very simple. It simply scratched the number two...and put three."


Dover’s plan fought off an attempt by Senator Loren Lippincott to amend it. Lippincott maintained that if lawmakers are allowed three consecutive four-year terms of service, then they should be required to sit out eight years…rather than four…before they could seek the office again.


"An eight-year gap ensures that if a senator returns, they face a new electorate. New challengers and new expectations. Not just a continuation of their prior campaign. This fosters a dynamic legislature that involves with Nebraska's needs from rural broadband to urban development. Now, some might say that eight years is too long, potentially discouraging experienced senators from returning. But, this is precisely the point....term limits is about renewal, not recycling."


Dover urged lawmakers to vote against Lippincott’s amendment. Legislative Speaker John Arch was one of those opposed to the amendment.


"We can debate whether it should be four years or eight years as to whether to sit out...but my concern is that it adds another variable to the proposal....one more thing for the voter to consider....well, I may like extending the twelve years, but I don't like extending the eight years. In my mind, I think this term limit initiative should be a very simple, clean, up-down....twelve years...three terms or not. The more variables we add to it, I think it just lends itself to the need for more education, the more discussion, the more explanation."


Lippincott’s amendment to establish an eight-year sit-out requirement was defeated by a vote of 5-to-24. The resolution then advanced to final reading.