Tag: nebraska
As Nebraska Goes In 2024, So Could Go Maine

As Nebraska Goes In 2024, So Could Go Maine

Every state is different. Nebraska is quite different. It is one of only two states that doesn't use the winner-take-all system in presidential elections. Along with Maine, it allocates its Electoral College votes to reflect the results in each of its congressional districts.

In 2020, Donald Trump lost the Omaha-based congressional district while winning Nebraska's other two. That cost him one electoral vote. In a very close election, that one vote could matter. Hence, Trump and his people have been pressuring Nebraska to adopt "winner-take-all," whereby whatever candidate received the most votes statewide would get all five of Nebraska's electoral votes.

This move is especially bold because in 2016, Trump did win Omaha's district. One supposes he could win it again the old-fashioned way, by getting more people to vote for him than for Joe Biden. As he's proved in terrifying ways, Trump is not a stickler for honoring the will of the people.

Don Bacon, the Republican representing the Omaha district, supports the Trump camp's efforts to change the state's method for assigning electoral votes. "I think it undermines the influence of Nebraska," he told CNN.

The opposite is more likely. Were Nebraska to embrace "winner-take-all," neither candidate would have great incentive to campaign there at all. As for the politics of it, one strains to understand how pushing to deprive his constituents the right to allocate their electoral vote is going to win Bacon love in his purple district.

So far these efforts have failed, even in the GOP-dominated state legislature. Good for them.

But pressure remains. Nebraska's current Republican governor, Jim Pillen, has offered to support a special legislative session to move the state to winner-take-all. "I will sign (winner-take-all) into law the moment the legislature gets it to my desk," he vowed.

However, Nebraska's unique political culture is deservedly a point of pride. There could be blowback on those who help outsiders try to change it.

For example, Nebraska is the only state with a one-chamber legislature. This dates back to 1934, when Nebraskans voted to replace a governing body with both a House and a Senate with a unicameral one. Party affiliations are not listed on the ballot.

This reform was pushed through by George W. Norris, a devout Republican. Norris argued that there was no logic in having a two-house legislature. On the contrary, it cost the taxpayers more money and made politicians less accountable to the people.

"The greatest evil of two-house legislature is its institution of the conference committee," Norris wrote in his autobiography. That's where power brokers could fiddle with passed bills.

"There the 'bosses' and the special interests and the monopolies get in their secret work behind the scenes," Norris wrote. "There the elimination of a sentence or paragraph, or even a word, may change the meaning of the entire law."

Meanwhile, were "reliably Democratic" Maine to adopt a winner-take-all system, that would cancel any Republican advantage in a Nebraska that did likewise. Maine's rural 2nd congressional district favored Trump both in 2016 and 2020.

Adding intrigue, Maine's House recently narrowly voted to have the state join an interstate compact that would assign its Electoral College votes to whatever presidential candidate won the national popular vote. So far 16 states have joined the compact, which would go into effect only if the members have enough electoral votes to determine the outcome.

In 2020, Biden won over seven million more popular votes than Trump did. And in 2016, Hillary Clinton comfortably beat Trump in the popular vote by three million.

It would not seem in Republicans' interests to encourage states to change how they count electoral votes. After all, as Nebraska goes, so could Maine.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Trump Campaign Leaves Thousands Stranded And Freezing, Several Hospitalized

Trump Campaign Leaves Thousands Stranded And Freezing, Several Hospitalized

At least seven supporters were taken to hospitals after Donald Trump's rally in Omaha Tuesday night, when temperatures plunged and buses intended to return them the several miles to the parking lot were unable to get through, leaving people stranded in freezing temperatures.

Trump took off in Air Force One around 9 pm local time, and the last of his supporters didn't make it out until after midnight. Tweets from the scene reported elderly Trump supporters getting cold and weak and disoriented as police struggled to help them.

Beyond the extremely poor planning, two things stand out. One, Nebraska has a more than 20 percent positivity rate on COVID-19 tests, and Trump was there for a crowded rally with mostly mask-less attendees. Naturally, he used this potential super-spreader event to claim "we're making that final turn" on the virus.

Two, in the final week before Election Day, the Republican incumbent was campaigning in Nebraska. Now, yes, Nebraska divides its electoral votes by congressional district, and one of them is up for grabs. But that tells us that Trump thinks his path to victory might depend on a single vote.

And in fighting for that single vote, Trump showed what a well-oiled campaign concerned for its supporters he is running.





Virus Exploded After Nebraska Governor Refused To Close Meatpacking Plant

Virus Exploded After Nebraska Governor Refused To Close Meatpacking Plant

Reprinted with permission from ProPublica.

On Tuesday, March 31, an emergency room doctor at the main hospital in Grand Island, Nebraska, sent an urgent email to the regional health department: “Numerous patients" from the JBS beef packing plant had tested positive for COVID-19. The plant, he feared, was becoming a coronavirus “hot spot."

The town's medical clinics were also reporting a rapid increase in cases among JBS workers. The next day, Dr. Rebecca Steinke, a family medicine doctor at one of the clinics, wrote to the department's director: “Our message is really that JBS should shut down for 2 weeks and have a solid screening plan before re-opening."

Read NowShow less
Why More States Should (Finally) Ban the Death Penalty

Why More States Should (Finally) Ban the Death Penalty

Most of the civilized world has come to regard killing someone held in captivity as barbaric. The death penalty has been abolished in the European Union and 19 U.S. states. Governors in four states that do permit capital punishment — Colorado, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Washington — have imposed a moratorium on executions.

The rest of America is getting there. For the first time in almost 50 years, less than half the public supports the death penalty, according to a new Pew Research Center survey. Even states that still put inmates to death seem to be losing the stomach for it. The United States is set to carry out fewer executions this year than it has since the early ’90s.

This November, voters in two very different places, Nebraska and California, will have an opportunity to remove state-sanctioned killing from their books. (Going the other way, a referendum in Oklahoma calls for amending the state constitution to protect the use of the death penalty.)

The most heated battle over the death penalty has taken place in Nebraska. It’s also the most significant one, for it shows how conflicted even conservative Americans have become over the practice. In fact, Nebraska hasn’t performed an execution in nearly 20 years. Conservatives in red states such as Missouri, Kentucky, Kansas, Wyoming and South Dakota, meanwhile, have sponsored bills to end the death penalty.

In Nebraska, lawmakers from both parties voted last year to eliminate the death penalty and replace it with mandatory life in prison for first-degree murder. Nebraska’s pro-capital punishment governor, Pete Ricketts, vetoed the bill. The legislature overturned the veto.

Ricketts then pushed a successful petition drive to put the matter on the ballot. Nebraskans will vote on whether to accept the legislature’s decision to strike the death penalty and instead require life without parole.

The outcome is hard to predict. “In certain issues, particularly with a populist strain, Nebraska is not nearly as doctrinaire conservative as people might think,” Paul Landow, professor of political science at the University of Nebraska Omaha, told me.

Ernie Chambers, a progressive from Omaha and the longest-serving state senator in Nebraska history, has introduced a measure to repeal the death penalty 37 times. “That kind of persistence has left an indelible mark on the issue,” Landow noted.

In California, a ballot measure to end the death penalty failed four years ago. This time, there are two referendums that seem at odds with each other. One would abolish the death penalty. The other would speed up the appeals process and thus hasten executions.

The case against the death penalty is well-known by now. Capital punishment exposes a state to the moral horror of killing an innocent person. Over the past 40 years, some 156 people on death row have been exonerated, many with the help of DNA evidence.

Citing church doctrine on the sanctity of life, the Nebraska Catholic Conference is urging voters to retain the repeal of the death penalty. One who opposes abortion on “pro-life” grounds, its argument goes, must also oppose the death penalty.

There’s little evidence that the death penalty deters murder. That leaves the questionable value of retribution — that erasing the monster who committed a heinous crime will bring comfort to the victims’ loved ones.

More and more survivors are countering this line of reasoning. Despite having suffered immeasurably, they hold that executing the criminal would just add to the toll. The state would somehow be justifying the crime of murder by committing it.

The movement away from capital punishment is clearly gathering force. This is one good direction in which our history is moving.

Follow Froma Harrop on Twitter @FromaHarrop. She can be reached at fharrop@gmail.com. To find out more about Froma Harrop and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators webpage at www.creators.com.

FILE PHOTO: Protesters calling for an end to the death penalty unfurl a banner before police arrest them outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington January 17, 2007. REUTERS/Jason Reed/File Photo