Legislative deja vu: Repeat bills tempt Lombardo's veto pen

LAS VEGAS (KTNV) — Gov. Joe Lombardo vetoed a record 75 bills in the 2023 session of the Nevada Legislature.

Contrary to popular belief, there's really no such thing as a veto stamp. Instead, the governor returns the bill to the Legislature, without his signature, along with a letter explaining his objections.

VIDEO: Steve Sebelius reports the latest on the Nevada Legislature

Earlier this year, Lombardo encouraged lawmakers to heed those objections.

"The admonishment, or the advisement, that goes along with a veto message is important, and so for the new legislation of a similar nature to come forward, hopefully those advisements or the information that I provide to justify the vetoes are addressed," Lombardo said.

But judging by some of the bills making their way through the legislative process, in several cases, lawmakers did not get the message. And in some cases, they're making a point to send the governor the exact same bill all over again.

Bills concerning landlord-tenant relations, free school meals for all students, banning firearms from polling places or prohibiting people who've committed hate crimes from having guns and outlawing fake slates of presidential electors are winding their way through the process.

In some cases, the bills have been tweaked from their original versions to comply with a gubernatorial veto. (For example, Lombardo said the 2023 penalty for being a fake elector was too harsh; the 2025 version lessens the punishment.)

But in other cases, the bills are the same, tempting a repeat of Lombardo's veto spree.

One notable exception came on Thursday evening, when Lombardo signed Assembly Bill 530, a bill to continue indexing the fuel tax to inflation in Clark County. Two years ago, he vetoed a similar bill, saying the matter should be decided by the voters.

“I would have strongly preferred that AB530 go before Southern Nevada voters directly," Lombardo said in a statement. "To avoid similar situations in the future, my office is exploring a statutory amendment to require all sunset bills to automatically go back to the ballot before the sunset expires. Politicians should not be the sole arbiters of sunset extensions, and if passed, this amendment would return the vote to the people.”

Nonetheless, at least in this case, Clark County residents won't get a chance to weigh in.

Why pass a bill that's already been vetoed?

There are some political reasons: Democrats can use the vetoes against the governor next year during his bid for re-election.

There are some practical reasons: A bill that's altered to comport with Lombardo's veto letters obviously stands a better chance of passing.

And there are also policy reasons, which is the reason most often cited by legislative leaders interviewed for this story.

Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro, D-Clark County, said the issues that prompted the vetoed legislation persist, notwithstanding the governor's objections.

"That problem didn't just go away because a bill was vetoed," she said in an interview in her Carson City office in April. "It didn't just miraculously disappear. It still exists. It is our job as legislators to continue to make that case."

Cannizzaro cited the example of her advocacy for a public option in Medicaid bill, which was derided initially as impossible. Instead of giving up, she kept at it, and finally got something passed.

"Sometimes it takes time to convince people that something could work," Cannizzaro said. "Sometimes it takes time for us to continue to let folks know that we're working on solutions. ... And so, I think it's worth the fight, and sometimes it is about persuading people that something is workable."

Assembly Majority Leader Sandra Jauregui, D-Clark County, the author of a couple of gun bills that were vetoed in 2023, said she brought them back because she thinks it's her duty.

"And again, just because the governor vetoed it in 2023 doesn't mean that I stop trying to do the right thing," Jauregui said. "I listened to my constituents, I listened to the people of Nevada, and what the people of Nevada want is safer communities."

But does she expect a different result from the governor this year as opposed to two years ago? Jauregui said she maintains hope.

"I would expect the governor to do the right thing, and that is the entire reason I brought the two [gun] bills back," she said. "I believe in second chances, and we're giving the governor a second chance to do the right thing."

And Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager, in a pre-session interview in his Las Vegas office, said, sometimes lawmakers will bring bills they know are doomed, because it's the right thing.

"There are times that we pass bills, and we know the governor's going to veto them. But they're still the right thing to do, and we're going to pass those and we think they're good policy," Yeager said. "So I don't think that's necessarily bad. I'm not interested in the politics of it. People are going to do that regardless."

The tension also underscores the rivalry between the executive and legislative branches. Cannizzaro said it would be dereliction for lawmakers to only bring bills that they believe the governor will sign.

"But as legislators, it's not for us to just go and say, 'Well, governor, do you like this or do you not, and if you don't then I'm not going to go fight for my constituents,'" she said. "There are real issues out there, and sometimes, you have to make the case, and you have to fight for that."