LINCOLN — Nebraska’s political year in 2024, as in much of the nation, was dominated by abortion politics. The issue influenced ballot initiatives and competitive races.
Voters in Nebraska, Florida and South Dakota became the first since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022 to reject ballot initiatives seeking to expand abortion rights.
The Nebraska vote was unique because abortion restrictionists passed a competing proposal on the same ballot, promoting it as a “moderate alternative” to the abortion-rights amendment. They said the status quo helps women and children.
Abortion-rights advocates spent much of the campaign fighting what they called “misinformation and disinformation” that miscast their effort to codify abortion rights as “extreme.” They said the way things are harms women and families.
One of the most common criticisms of the abortion-rights amendment was that it would allow “abortion until birth,” which organizers said it would not.
That November contest, and its spillover into other competitive races, ranked among the top five political stories of 2024, as selected by the staff of the Nebraska Examiner:
Dueling abortion votes
Nebraskans adopted Initiative 434, an abortion-restrictions amendment that bans most abortions after the first trimester, with exceptions for the life of the mother, rape and incest.
The language was written by anti-abortion advocates who crafted it to sound like it would cement into the State Constitution the state’s current ban after 12 weeks gestational age.
It does so, but only as a ceiling. No future Legislature could loosen the current restrictions on abortion. Any Legislature could, however, tighten restrictions, up to a full ban.
National conservatives discuss the approach by Nebraska’s abortion restrictionists as a potential model for red states to survive pushes to expand abortion rights at the ballot box.
Voters rejected Initiative 439, the abortion-rights amendment seeking to sharply curb the state’s ability to restrict abortion and leave the decision between a woman and her “treating health care practitioner.”
Local organizing by church-led groups in rural and ring areas opposed to abortion swamped the urban and suburban strongholds of the abortion-rights movement.
The abortion ballot initiatives helped motivate voters on all sides of the issue. In addition to the obvious draw of a presidential election, it helped boost turnout rates.
Some abortion-rights supporters questioned whether 439 went too far by leaving the timing of abortion legality to the judgment of health care practitioners about fetal viability.
Critics of the abortion-rights amendment argued it could be stretched to allow later-term abortions than many Nebraskans would be comfortable with.
A few experienced Nebraska political consultants have argued the abortion-rights initiative would have fared better by legalizing abortion until a set number of weeks, up to 20 or 22 weeks.
Conservatives, meanwhile, are considering how to export their competing initiatives approach to other states.
Medical cannabis passes
Nebraska voters in November overwhelmingly approved legalizing cannabis for medicinal purposes, letting it be used by people with a written recommendation from a health care practitioner.
This was the latest step in a years-long fight by families of the sick to gain access to a pain- and seizure-fighting drug that Nebraska’s governor and attorney general still argue is banned under federal law.
The fight to reach the ballot was part of the story, with the two medical cannabis initiatives voters approved, Initiatives 437 and 438, receiving less financial help nationally.
Part of that fight continues in court, including one legal challenge headed for the Nebraska Supreme Court spearheaded by longtime opponents of marijuana legalization of any kind.
The arguments against the medical cannabis petition efforts have tried to scrutinize and toss out thousands of state-validated signatures and fight the legality of the change.
Defenders of medical cannabis point to efforts to reclassify the drug federally and that it is legal in Nebraska’s neighboring states of Missouri, Colorado and South Dakota.
One of the key organizers had argued her son needed the medicine to help him live more comfortably with his symptoms.
Some 38 states allow cannabis for medical use. Of those, 24 have also legalized recreational marijuana use. Opponents hope the Nebraska cases help them assert the primacy of federal law.
Nebraskans who want to purchase cannabis as medication in the state will not be able to do so until a freshly authorized state commission sets state rules for medical marijuana by July 1.
Under the change, the first distribution licenses would have to be issued by Oct. 1.
Osborn makes Fischer compete
One of Nebraska’s U.S. Senate races made the top five because of an unexpectedly close race. Nonpartisan Omaha labor leader Dan Osborn put a scare into two-term incumbent U.S. Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb.
Most figured Fischer would easily win in a state where registered Republicans outnumber Democrats about 2-to-1 and nonpartisans and others make up about a fourth of the state’s electorate.
Few predicted Osborn’s ability to raise nearly $15 million and attract another $20 million in outside spending, including late from national Democrats.
Fischer ultimately won by single digits, 53%-47%. She blamed reporters for helping Osborn create a nonpartisan narrative for what she described as “a Democrat in sheep’s clothing.”
She raised a personal-record $8.4 million this cycle and spent $8.8 million. He spent $14.8 million. In a rarity for a red state, she needed late help from national Republicans.
Her bid also got a boost from Ending Spending, a group tied to the parents of junior U.S. Sen. Pete Ricketts, R-Neb. The same group helped her win a three-way GOP primary in 2012.
Fischer and her campaign largely ignored Osborn for months, emphasizing her work to bring roads, bridges and broadband spending and national defense investments to Nebraska.
Late in the race, Fischer’s team attacked Osborn’s statements in national and local interviews about immigration, Social Security and comments about Vermont U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders.
After former President Donald Trump’s win and the GOP takeover of Congress, Osborn’s over-performance is viewed nationally by some Democrats as a reason to reevaluate the party’s brand.
Osborn, a steamfitter, has started a new hybrid political action committee aimed at helping more working-class candidates run. He credited his results to being a normal guy with a regular job.
He paid himself from his campaign funds so he could afford to miss work and campaign.
He had argued that Fischer and most in Washington, D.C., were out of touch with kitchen-table issues most care about, including union organizing, health care and higher wages.
He was quoted this week in a Politico story about Democrats considering running more blue-collar candidates without party labels.
He also supported abortion rights, while Fischer backed restrictions. Fischer has said Nebraskans saw through him and his branding as a nonpartisan.
Property tax push
Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen spent a lot of his election-earned political capital in 2024 pressing the Legislature to adopt structural changes to the property tax system.
He warned lawmakers if they didn’t adopt significant property tax relief during the regular legislative session in the spring that he would call them back to session until they did.
Pillen called a special session in July and August with the purpose of reducing the state’s reliance on local property taxes to fund governance, including K-12 education, the biggest cost.
He had hoped to pass a proposal that he said would cut property taxes by 50%, but he managed to secure the votes for Legislative Bill 34, a slimmed-down proposal that might provide 20% in relief when combined with existing relief programs.
State Sen. Justin Wayne of Omaha and others tried and failed to add help for renters and not just homeowners. Others criticized Pillen’s pre-session meetings for excluding too many senators.
State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Omaha has said the relief package would help, particularly by no longer requiring people to file to receive income tax credits for property tax relief.
Pillen has said he is not done pushing for changes and will try again, but his ambitions could be limited by fiscal reality. Budget projections show the state in a $432 million hole.
That may not leave enough room for more ambitious reforms.
‘Blue dot’ survives for now
Most of Nebraska’s Republican establishment and their right-wing base aligned with then-candidate Donald Trump in trying to shift the state to winner-take-all for the 2024 presidential election.
Pillen, Trump and much of the Nebraska Republican Party argue that Nebraska should award all its votes to the statewide winner of the presidential popular vote.
But Pillen and Trump didn’t listen to the Legislature’s newest member of the GOP, State Sen. Mike McDonnell of Omaha, who had said when he changed from being a Democrat that he supported the status quo.
Nebraska and Maine are the only two states that split their Electoral College votes for president by congressional district. This often leaves the Omaha-based 2nd District up for grabs.
McDonnell flirted with adopting a winner-take-all approach. He said he heard no argument more persuasive than the $20 million or more each cycle in campaign spending that helps Omaha. State senators in Omaha and Lincoln have argued this benefits the state economically.
Republicans needed 33 votes to break a filibuster. There was no way to get to 33 without McDonnell. He was applauded by Democrats and attacked by Republicans for standing pat.
He is now running for mayor in a nonpartisan primary against Republican incumbent Mayor Jean Stothert. Also competing in the race are Democratic candidates Jasmine Harris and John Ewing.
Nebraska sided with Trump, sending four of the state’s five electoral votes to the president-elect. But the 2nd District backed Vice President Kamala Harris, sending her one vote.
It was the third time in the past five elections that a Democrat has won a single vote from the 2nd District, starting with then-U.S. Sen. Barack Obama in 2008. Trump won the 2nd in 2016.
Signs on both sides of the campaign featured the ‘blue dot,” with Democrats highlighting their support with a single dot and Republicans sharing variations of Trump eating the blue dot.
Pillen, in an interview this month, said he hopes McDonnell and others being term-limited will give Republicans enough votes to end the “blue dot” once and for all this spring.
Opponents of the change, including Nebraska Democratic Party Chair Jane Kleeb, have argued senators will find the votes to maintain a filibuster and preserve district-based voting.
Honorable mentions:
Felon voting rights restored
Nebraska lawmakers in April passed Legislative Bill 20 to restore the voting rights of people convicted of felonies once their criminal sentences have been completed, instead of making them wait two years to vote.
The Legislature’s push to pass and defend the new law from what some described as executive overreach was part of a broader theme in 2024 of defending legislative prerogatives. Leaders similarly pushed back against efforts to limit legislative oversight of the executive branch.
Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers angered a bipartisan group of senators by issuing an informal opinion arguing that only the executive branch could restore voting rights — and only via the Pardons Board process.
Secretary of State Bob Evnen followed the AG’s opinion and paused registrations for months under the new law and an older one, LB 53 of 2005. Some argued the voting rights of some people of color and some people with limited means were being suppressed.
Attorney general’s opinions are advisory and do not carry the weight of a judge’s legal opinion. Voting rights advocates from Civic Nebraska and ACLU Nebraska, with legislative backing, challenged the registration pause in court, and the Nebraska Supreme Court agreed.
The justices ruled narrowly that the law was the law until a court had decided otherwise. They left for another day the decision over whether the right to restore a person’s voting rights in Nebraska is constitutionally reserved for the executive or legislative branch.
Jason Kotas and TJ King of Omaha both cast their first ballots on Oct. 16 since being convicted. Both described it as helping them feel more connected to their communities.
“It lets us know that a lot of us that were in the fight … that our voices were heard, and that it didn’t fall on deaf ears,” King said at the time. “We have a voice now.”
Heavican retires and is replaced by Funke
The Nebraska Supreme Court usually makes this list with its decisions, not because of the decision to retire. But the decision by Heavican to retire reverberated.
The former Lancaster County prosecutor oversaw massive change during his tenure on the state’s high court, including the shift from a center-left court to one that leans more to the right.
He saw the implementation of court oversight of the probation system, the expansion of specialty courts like drug courts and veterans courts, and pressed for technological change.
On the transparency front, Heavican expanded cameras in the courtroom and made it easier for reporters to use modern technology to cover proceedings in Nebraska’s courts.
He retired after 18 years as chief and was replaced in late October by one of his conservative colleagues, Justice Jeffrey Funke, whom Ricketts appointed to the court in 2016.
Funke is a conservative justice who was a former prosecutor and public defender and a judge in Cass County and on the local district court.
He walks into a period in which the court may be deciding key cases on voting rights, on separation of powers and on legalizing medical cannabis.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
SUBSCRIBE
