This month, Nebraska lawmakers will debate whether or not to move laws that makes Nebraska’s electoral system “winner-take-all.”
In final November’s election, 4 of the state’s 5 electoral votes went to Donald Trump, with one from Nebraska’s Second Congressional District (the “blue dot”) going to Kamala Harris.
“Blue dot” proponents hope the apply of splitting electoral votes in presidential elections (adopted solely by Nebraska and Maine) spreads to extra states.
Jane Kleeb, chairman of the Nebraska Democratic Celebration, stated Nebraskans needs to be happy with the Second District’s “blue dot” as a result of it makes the state “distinctive.”
And so, Kleeb stated, “let the different states comply with our lead in true consultant democracy.”
She sees the “blue dot” as a chance to affect nationwide politics and appeal to media consideration; I see the “blue dot” as fomenting city vs. rural resentment, and as a wedge that drives Nebraskans aside.
The sharpest divide in American politics is city vs. rural.
Statistics present that roughly two-thirds of city voters select Democrat candidates; roughly two-thirds of rural voters select Republicans. Although many Nebraskans can hint their household histories again to the farm, the expansion of cities means extra persons are faraway from these early pioneers who formed our state’s identification.
This precept holds true for different states.
In February, Indiana’s Home of Representatives handed a invoice to contemplate annexing 33 counties in rural Illinois, a transfer towards which some Illinois residents have labored for 5 years. Illinois ranks third nationally within the export of agricultural commodities, and rural residents imagine their values and lifestyle are worlds away from Cook dinner County and town of Chicago.
Like these Illinois residents, rural voters in Nebraska, particularly in western Nebraska, argue that their pursuits are underrepresented in state politics. Whereas the state’s financial system is anchored in Omaha and Lincoln, most of Nebraska is devoted to the manufacturing of corn, soybeans, cattle, and different agricultural merchandise.
One of many objectives of Nebraska politics needs to be to reconcile variations, to talk with one voice relatively than two.
That was the key to Ben Nelson’s successful marketing campaign for Nebraska Governor in 1990.
Nelson, a lawyer, reached out to folks from throughout the state, encouraging a way of solidarity in “One Nebraska.” He requested voters to consider points by way of their households, neighbors, and group. Nelson stated the key to his success was to make authorities work for everyone, and to cease preventing over whether or not persons are rural or city.
However the “blue dot” aggravates that division, splitting Nebraska’s citizens and inspiring politicians to focus time, cash, and a spotlight on city relatively than nationwide points.
If rural Nebraska counties have been to comply with Illinois’ instance, they actually would discover a extra favorable tax local weather in South Dakota or Wyoming. I hope they wouldn’t discover a stronger spirit of solidarity and state delight.
To resolve the issue, state legislators have put ahead a “winner-take-all” invoice to align Nebraska with 48 different states, although latest historical past suggests Legislative Invoice 3 might not move into legislation.
Regardless of the end result of this legislative session, one thing wants to alter.
Much less “blue dot” or “winner-take-all.”
Extra “One Nebraska,” standing tall.
John J. Waters is a author in Nebraska, and that is his private opinion. Observe him at @JohnJWaters1 on X.
