The Nebraska Legislature doesn’t convene for another four months, but a fresh look at what’s on voters’ minds is always helpful. That was clear at a recent legislative candidate forum in Lincoln.

Six hopefuls shared the stage, answering questions primarily about environmental issues and then staying around to answer even more questions one-on-one. You know … what they do in democracies.

That, plus you have to admire those who put themselves on the ballot these days, given the growing disdain throughout the precincts for government, politics and our institutions in general. So kudos to candidates Caitlin Knutson in District 2, incumbent Sen. George Dungan in District 26, former state Sen. Patty Pansing Brooks in District 28, Janet Bock in District 30, Shay Smith in District 32 and incumbent Sen. Danielle Conrad in District 46.

The evening was also a welcome respite from the miasma of our headlines: nonsense about renaming a Great Lake; further bad news on the inextricable quagmire with Iran; the increased cost of everything and now even more so if it has with a maple leaf stamped on it; measles deaths and explosive diarrhea; tainted meat and vaccine vagaries; and bad actors apparently hijacking the petition process in Nebraska. It’s exhausting.

The forum was a live, eyeball-to-eyeball affair, where each of the sextet acquitted themselves well on a variety of topics from clean energy to water quality to the consequences of climate change. These particular candidates — none of whom had their opponents on the dais with them — shared plenty of common ground. Still, it’s always instructive to hear personal perspectives, especially knowing from where they glean the information they use to develop a position or an opinion.

Whoever arrives at the Legislature the first week in January will be faced with a daunting task: addressing the 2027-2029 budget, which at this writing calls to mind images of the Red Sea as deficits approach the B-word. Thirteen of 49 senators will not be returning, whether via term limits or choice. That means in this election Nebraska voters have a chance to loosen the numerical headlock a supermajority can have on the legislative process.

The next Legislature will obviously be focused on extracting the state from its self-inflicted budget crisis. I’m guessing our annual head scratching over property taxes will fill a few days and weeks, too, but, if history serves — and it usually does — few will be satisfied with the outcome. Voting access, education and a myriad of other subjects will fill the chamber from Jan. 6, 2027, to about the first of June.

According to my reading of the candidates’ responses, two issues senators will be addressing next session emerged front and center at the forum: data centers and undoing the looting of the Environmental Trust Fund.

Apparently data centers, built to fuel the AI boom, are on the minds of many Nebraskans on whose doors the candidates have been knocking. They don’t want them. Government leaders, including in Nebraska, who had championed data centers to supply big tech its sustenance have also heard the ruckus opponents are making and slowed or backtracked incentives to bring the water-guzzling, power-sucking, heat-generating facilities to their neighborhoods.

Of course, the argument for data centers is that without them, we’ll fall behind in the AI race, an ill-defined contest that apparently will determine our future as a country or a species … something along those lines. On the way to securing this victory, we’re told, AI will make our lives more productive and efficient while simultaneously rendering many of our jobs obsolete.

That’s a lot to think about. Nebraska voters should demand their legislators do just that.

Finally, while a Lancaster County District judge has put a temporary kibosh on the process, no one among the candidates had anything remotely good to say about the recent budgetary practice of taking constitutionally protected money from the Environmental Trust Fund to essentially pay the state’s bills, using a sort of governmental procedural pass-through. A bill in the last session of the Legislature that would have put a constitutional amendment reaffirming the shielding of the trust’s funds on the ballot this November failed to advance. Is it just me or does it seem odd to have to amend the state constitution to say what it already says?

Not to belabor the point but to put the raiding of the trust’s money in apostolic proportions, Paul was depositing a check (ironically still not enough to cover his bills) while Peter was filing a police report for theft.

Meanwhile, early voting starts soon, so a glimpse about what’s on the minds of candidates — and voters — gives a fresh take on Nebraska’s axiom of citizen watchfulness.