Nebraska is one of only two U.S. states that currently uses a split system to allocate its electoral votes in presidential elections. Majority of states use a winner-takes-all approach, where the candidate winning the state’s popular vote gets all of that state’s electoral votes. In Nebraska, however, the system allows for the electoral votes to be divided among candidates.
Recently, there has been a push, seemingly inspired by former President Donald Trump’s unfounded claims of electoral fraud in the 2020 election, to change the state’s electoral vote system to a winner-takes-all approach. However, Nebraska lawmakers have voted against this proposal.
Opponents of the change argue it would render the state irrelevant in presidential elections, making it less likely to receive campaign visits and attention from presidential candidates. By contrast, proponents claim it would prevent the possibility of the state’s votes being split among candidates, which they believe could create confusion and potentially distort the representation of the state’s voters at the national level. Nonetheless, the proposal did not pass.
Nebraska lawmakers vote against Trump-fueled push to change electoral vote system
Nebraska is one of only two U.S. states that currently uses a split system to allocate its electoral votes in presidential elections. Majority of states use a winner-takes-all approach, where the candidate winning the state’s popular vote gets all of that state’s electoral votes. In Nebraska, however, the system allows for the electoral votes to be divided among candidates.
Recently, there has been a push, seemingly inspired by former President Donald Trump’s unfounded claims of electoral fraud in the 2020 election, to change the state’s electoral vote system to a winner-takes-all approach. However, Nebraska lawmakers have voted against this proposal.
Opponents of the change argue it would render the state irrelevant in presidential elections, making it less likely to receive campaign visits and attention from presidential candidates. By contrast, proponents claim it would prevent the possibility of the state’s votes being split among candidates, which they believe could create confusion and potentially distort the representation of the state’s voters at the national level. Nonetheless, the proposal did not pass.
