Gov. Jim Pillen, Republicans have sought change from district system for years.
Nebraska Examiner Press Release
BY: AARON SANDERFORD – JANUARY 30, 2025
LINCOLN — Nebraskans came out in big numbers Thursday to criticize — but mostly to defend — the state’s unusual system of awarding Electoral College votes for president by congressional district.
State Sen. Rita Sanders of Bellevue, chair of the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee, dealt with overflow crowds, including some spilling over into an adjacent room and hall.
Some would-be testifiers left before speaking, with some expressing frustration about long lines. Many of those who stayed represented political parties or civic groups. Others signed in on yellow sheets to signal where they stood and watched.
Differences were palpable in the first public hearing on the issue without the urgency of 2024 election-related pressure from President Donald Trump or his campaign surrogates.
The Trump factor
Chief among Thursday’s differences was the makeup of testifiers: More people spoke this time in support of preserving the current district method of awarding electoral votes than testified against it.
Last year, Trump spoke with Nebraska state senators, as did local consultants helping his campaign. That was when both parties worried the Omaha area might break a national tie in the Electoral College.
Trump was still a factor this week, with fears of the president’s displeasure motivating Gov. Jim Pillen before a possible 2026 GOP primary race with a top Trump donor, Charles Herbster.
Legislative Bill 3 by State Sen. Loren Lippincott of Central City would shift Nebraska to awarding all five of the state’s electoral votes to the statewide winner of the presidential popular vote.
Pillen and GOP want all five votes
Nebraska and Maine, uniquely among states, award a single electoral vote to the winner of the presidential popular vote in each congressional district. The other 48 states award all electoral votes to the statewide winner, which is often called “winner-take-all.”
Legislative Resolution 24CA, a proposed constitutional amendment from State Sen. Myron Dorn of Adams, would have voters consider a similar change.
Pillen’s policy research director, Kenny Zoeller, testified in support of Lippincott’s LB 3. He argued Nebraskans should move to winner-take-all and need to retain the flexibility to change again in the future, which Zoeller said a constitutional amendment like Dorn’s LR 24CA wouldn’t allow.
“The promised benefits of the current system have been exaggerated or just not met,” Zoeller said.
Most Republicans who spoke backed the Nebraska Republican Party’s decades-long push to shift to winner-take-all.
Most Democrats backed the Nebraska Democratic Party’s change from the 1990s under former Gov. Ben Nelson that split the state’s electoral votes.
Harder to predict
And some Nebraskans bucked party and geography, including Warren Phelps, chair of the Cheyenne County GOP who said he wants to keep the district system so rural Republicans in the 3rd Congressional District always have a voice.
He said the GOP majority in the officially nonpartisan Legislature should consider the changing demographics in the state and the population growth in the Omaha and Lincoln areas.
He said Republicans might one day appreciate having the district system if the state blues up over time. He said he and other rural Republicans do not “want to be drowned out.”
“Competition makes everybody better,” Phelps said, adding that the GOP should compete for Omaha votes. “It forces candidates to come up with ideas. Ideas that … help the whole country.”
Ron Cunningham, who described himself as a longtime Republican, argued that no Nebraskan should want other people’s votes to count less and that the district system works.
“Republicans continue to talk about and promote unity and fairness, but they don’t want those votes to count,” Cunningham said.
Seeking standardized approach
Michael Tiedeman, a Sarpy County Republican, said the state GOP wants the change to reduce the amount of outside spending on Nebraska elections, including the presidential race.
He said keeping the so-called “blue dot” would lead to greater competition during redistricting to gerrymander the Omaha-based 2nd Congressional District that’s been up for grabs.
He pointed to suburban, exurban and rural Washington County as an example of what could happen. That county has been in all three of the state’s U.S. House districts in recent decades.
“This district was a political experiment that did not make sense in the 1990s, and it does not make sense in 2025,” Tiedeman said. “Please get this bill out of committee.”
Jeanne Reigle, a former legislative candidate from Madison who is government relations director of the Nebraska GOP, said the outside spending concentrates more money and power in the east.
She said small rural communities and their needs too often get drowned out by the national and local focus on reporting from the up-for-grabs 2nd Congressional District.
“They’re hurting,” Reigle said. “They’re dwindling. There are very few rural senators left. And very few left involved with agriculture.”
Liz Abel, who lives in “blue dot” territory in Omaha, said she supports winner-take-all. The Republican said dividing Nebraska’s electoral votes “splinters our electorate” and adds to divisions between rural and urban Nebraska.
She also said she would like to receive less campaign mail from Democrats like former President Joe Biden or nonpartisans like former U.S. Senate candidate Dan Osborn. She said she hoped getting rid of the district system in ruby red Republican Nebraska might lead Democrats to spend their money elsewhere.
“I believe having a split vote diminishes our state’s influence,” Abel said.
Protecting the ‘blue dot’
Preston Love Jr., a civil rights activist in North Omaha who ran for U.S. Senate as a Democrat, said the move by the majority feels to him and others like voter suppression.
He echoed statements from the campaign trail where he said black and brown Nebraskans already vote in lower numbers and getting rid of district-level electoral votes would depress turnout.
Democrats and Republicans split the past five presidential elections in the 2nd District, with Democrats winning the district in 2024, 2020 and 2008 and Republicans winning it in 2016 and 2012.
Republicans won statewide each time.
“Listen to a segment of your community, your state, a whole congressional district to let our votes count,” Love said. “I think everyone in Congressional District 2 feels that way.
“Are you just ignoring us?”
Melina Arroyo, who said it was her first time speaking to a legislative committee, told senators Nebraska should not change what makes it stand apart in a good way from others.
She said voters benefit from the attention being paid to a state that in no other way would qualify as a swing state. Republicans outnumber Democrats more than 2 to 1, with nonpartisans growing.
She said the district system “ensures that the voices of all Nebraskans are heard.” Arroyo argued that voters of every political persuasion feel more involved here.
“It shows that we value diversity and fairness in how votes are cast and counted,” she said.
Next steps
Lippincott, a Republican, said he was encouraged to see the turnout, that it showed a government for the people. He argued that “having winner-take-all is unifying.”
Dorn said he would support Lippincott’s bill but that his proposed constitutional amendment should be treated as a fallback position in case LB 3 stalls.
State Sen. John Cavanaugh of Omaha, a Democrat, said there was nothing unifying about wanting to “diminish the value of the votes of these people.”
The Government Committee still must vote on whether to move the measures to the legislative floor. That vote could come as early as Monday.
