The Nevada State Legislature has witnessed a series of significant legislative battles recently, particularly regarding bills aimed at capping prescription drug prices and other key social issues. In recent sessions, many of these proposals encountered a formidable barrier: Governor Joe Lombardo's vetoes. The upcoming election could change this dynamic significantly.
During his term, Governor Lombardo has vetoed numerous bills, including measures to impose caps on prescription drug prices, which passed twice in the legislature, and a cap on rent increases for seniors. These vetoes are part of a broader trend, with Lombardo rejecting 87 bills in 2023 alone. This situation creates a tense backdrop for the election.
The stakes are high as the election approaches on Tuesday. Political analysts suggest that should the Democratic Party maintain its legislative majorities and Attorney General Aaron Ford emerge victorious against Lombardo, it would mark a watershed moment for Nevada politics. For the first time since January 2023, Democrats would regain control over the governor’s office and both legislative chambers.
Recent polling indicates a tight race, with both candidates receiving roughly 42% support, according to the RealClearPolitics average. Should Ford win the governorship, he has indicated intentions to resurrect several bills that had been vetoed by Lombardo, providing a blueprint for a more progressive legislative agenda.
Among the first actions Ford has signaled he would take include signing bills that address critical issues like drug pricing, education, and housing. He aims to implement a cap on prescription drug prices aligned with Medicare levels, potentially providing significant relief to Nevada residents struggling with healthcare costs. Additionally, he has expressed support for universal free school meals and measures to restrict corporate homebuying.
Governor Lombardo has defended his vetoes, claiming they serve to protect Nevadans from expensive mandates. He has warned that a Democratic sweep could result in higher taxes and financial burdens on families. The contrasting narratives of the candidates highlight fundamental differences in their approaches to governance and fiscal policy.
Regardless of the election's outcome, several key issues are poised to resurface in the 2027 legislative session. Despite previous vetoes, various bills have returned to the table, often reworked to address the governor's earlier concerns. However, these adjustments have not always guaranteed success.
Revived Legislative Proposals
One of the significant bills poised to return is Assembly Bill 259, which aims to cap prescription drug prices based on Medicare standards under the Inflation Reduction Act. Lombardo previously labeled the previous version as arbitrary, arguing it could lead to substantial state financial burdens due to potential losses in drug rebates for Medicaid.
In the realm of education, Assembly Bill 319 sought to allocate $43 million towards maintaining universal free breakfast and lunch programs in public schools, a measure Lombardo vetoed on the grounds that a vast percentage of schools already provide free meals. A follow-up bill, Assembly Bill 268, aims to secure $86 million over two years to further this initiative.
Another critical issue involves corporate homebuying. Senate Bill 395 proposed to limit corporate investors to acquiring 1,000 homes per year. Lombardo rejected this as an arbitrary measure. In response, the 2025 version of the legislation, Senate Bill 391, lowered that cap to 100 homes but ultimately failed to secure enough support for passage.
Discussions around a senior rent cap have also surfaced, with Ford indicating he would support a cap specifically for seniors. Although Lombardo previously vetoed a proposal for a 10% increase limit, the 2025 variant proposed a more moderate 5% cap for a pilot period, which Lombardo argued could deter investment in rental properties.
Healthcare and Labor Issues
Healthcare legislation has also encountered roadblocks due to vetoes. Senate Bill 217 aimed to establish a right to in vitro fertilization and require most insurance companies, including Medicaid, to provide coverage. Lombardo expressed support for access to IVF but cited financial constraints as a reason for his veto.
Additional healthcare-related proposals that have faced vetoes include legislation on nurse-to-patient ratios in hospitals and limits on medical debt collection practices. Lombardo's administration has consistently rejected these measures, contending that they intrude into private contracts or impose unfounded financial burdens.
Labor-related initiatives have similarly faced challenges. Assembly Bill 388 sought to mandate paid family and medical leave for large employers, while other bills aimed to enhance protections for workers regarding unpaid wages and bargaining rights for teachers. These bills failed to gain traction amidst vetoes as well.
Tenant Rights and Electoral Integrity
The tenant rights movement has also proposed several bills intended to reform the eviction process, including measures to allow tenants to withhold rent for necessary repairs and automatically seal eviction records. However, these initiatives have encountered strong opposition and rejection in previous sessions.
Electoral integrity has been a contentious topic, with proposals like Assembly Bill 306 aimed at ensuring mail ballot drop boxes remain available during the election period. Lombardo vetoed this measure, citing a lack of oversight as a concern. Additionally, legislation aimed at expanding voting access for nonpartisan voters has also faced hurdles due to vetoes.
Furthermore, a proposed ordinance prohibiting the submission of false presidential elector slates faced similar challenges. This measure emerged in response to controversies surrounding the 2020 election and was vetoed by Lombardo on the grounds of being overly expansive.
Gun Control Legislation
Gun control has also remained a divisive topic, with Lombardo vetoing multiple proposals, including one aimed at banning individuals under 21 from owning semiautomatic rifles. These vetoes reflect a broader reluctance to enact stringent gun control measures in the state.
Other proposed legislation sought to limit gun possession near polling places and restrict access to firearms for individuals convicted of hate crimes. Yet, these measures have repeatedly faced the governor's veto.
Conclusion: Looking Ahead
The potential implications of the upcoming election extend beyond just the immediate outcome. Should Aaron Ford secure the governorship, it could pave the way for a resurgence of previously vetoed legislation, addressing key issues in healthcare, education, and housing. On the other hand, a victory for Lombardo would likely mean a continuation of his current policy framework, characterized by fiscal restraint and a cautious approach to new mandates.
The legislative landscape in Nevada remains complex, with numerous challenges on the horizon regardless of the election outcome. As the session begins on February 1, both parties will need to navigate the intricate dynamics of governance, ensuring that their respective agendas resonate with the needs of their constituents.
Source: Las Vegas Sun
Illustration photo: Authors of the study: Peter Majewski, Rong Deng, Pablo R Dia / Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 4.0)
