Nebraska Lawmakers Buck Trump Block Winner Take All Proposal

Nebraska legislators made headlines Wednesday night as they blocked an attempt to alter the state’s Electoral College votes allocation. This decision comes amidst considerable pressure from former President Donald Trump, who has advocated for a winner-take-all system—a move that could potentially benefit him in upcoming elections.

The proposal faced a significant setback, failing to pass in a procedural vote with a tally of 8-36. As the Republican-controlled legislative session nears its conclusion, this failure introduces doubts about the measure’s viability and future support.

Nebraska’s unique method of distributing electoral votes has long been a topic of discussion. Currently, Nebraska awards three of its five Electoral College votes based on the results of its three congressional districts; the other two votes are awarded based on whoever wins the state overall. This system places a spotlight on the competitive 2nd District in the Omaha area, making it a significant battleground despite the state’s overall Republican-leaning.

According to the Nebraska GOP, they tried to change this before but got no help from the former RNC Chair.

State Sen. Loren Lippincott, who championed the winner-take-all bill, expressed intentions to revive the measure for one last attempt before the session ends on April 18. However, the path forward remains uncertain, with support for the change appearing shaky in the Republican-controlled legislature. Additionally, a Democrat has switched parties after he was attacked for being pro-life, which would give Republicans a filibuster-proof majority if the bill was voted on. However, since the procedural vote failed 8-36, it would appear Republicans aren’t interested in changing the law.

In a strategic move, Republican state Sen. Julie Slama attempted to expedite the proposal by offering it as an amendment to existing legislation. Unfortunately for proponents, this approach was thwarted when the amendment was deemed not relevant enough to the underlying bill, a decision that adhered to state law requiring amendments to be “germane” to the legislation they seek to modify.




Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here