A Republican representative from Nebraska said Monday he still opposes changing the way the state distributes its electoral votes, effectively blocking an effort by President Donald Trump and his allies to change the system in a bid to win additional electors this fall.
Trump allies have pushed for a special legislative session aimed at moving Nebraska’s Republican-controlled legislature to a winner-take-all system, rather than awarding electoral votes by district.
“After careful consideration, it is clear to me that now, 43 days before Election Day, is not the time to make this change,” Sen. Mike McDonnell wrote in a letter obtained by NBC News.
Nebraska Republican Sen. Loren Lippincott, who sponsored the bill to move the state to a winner-takes-all system, indicated Monday that McDonnell’s position means a special session is not expected this fall to introduce the legislation.
In response to questions about McDonnell’s statement, Lippincott emailed NBC News a draft of his weekly op-ed in local newspapers, which reads: “Governor Pillen would not call a special session unless he had assurances from 33 senators that they would vote yes on the bill. That effort was unsuccessful. There will be no special session to address Winner Take All. I will reintroduce this bill the next legislative session.”
Lippincott made it clear in an email that he has not yet heard directly from Pillen, but he expects the governor to comment later this week.
“Time is running out and I don’t see a path forward just based on what the governor said,” said Nebraska State Sen. Merv Riepe, a Republican who discussed the effort last week with Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Trump.
Riepe told NBC News that he initially had reservations about changing the law so close to the election, but that he would not stop his party members from making the change.
Riepe said the first change to Nebraska’s electoral college system was enacted in 1992 in hopes of getting more media attention and money spent on presidential elections in Omaha. “I’ve heard senators say, ‘Well, let’s just wait and do it next year,'” he said. “And you’re like, ‘Are you crazy?’ It won’t mean anything because you’re talking about waiting until ’28. So it’s basically, do it now or don’t worry about it.”
McDonnell represents a Senate district in the Omaha area and is reportedly considering a run for mayor of Omaha. A former Democrat, he switched parties and became a Republican in April after Democrats in the state censured him.
The developments appear to be the culmination of months of deliberations over whether Nebraska lawmakers can change the way the state distributes its electoral votes in Trump’s favor.
Nebraska distributes its electors by constituency. The constituency around Omaha has gone to the Democrats twice in recent years, giving them one elector in an otherwise ruby-red state.
But if lawmakers changed that to a winner-take-all model, Trump would almost certainly win all of Nebraska’s electoral votes.
And there is a plausible scenario in which that could determine who the next president becomes.
For example, if Vice President Kamala Harris were to win Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, but lose all the other swing states, she and Trump would be tied with 269 electoral votes in Nebraska, with Trump winning the state.
In that scenario, the race would be thrown to the U.S. House of Representatives, where each state delegation would get one vote for president. Republicans hold a majority of the delegations and are favored to keep them, even though the majority in the House could change hands after the November elections.
However, if Nebraska did not change the distribution of the votes and Harris won Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, but lost all the other swing states, she would win the presidential election with 270 electoral votes.
Democrats in Nebraska welcomed McDonnell’s announcement.
“Nebraska has a long and proud tradition of independence and our electoral system reflects that by ensuring that the outcomes of our elections truly represent the will of the people, free from interference,” said Nebraska Democratic Party Chair Jane Kleeb.
“Senator McDonnell stands strong against the enormous pressure from out-of-state interests to protect Nebraskans’ voice in our democracy. In this election and in the coming elections, Nebraskans will continue to lead by electing leaders at every level who stand up for the people and respect our spirit of independence,” Kleeb added.
Last week, Graham, a Trump ally, met with Pillen and about two dozen Republican lawmakers to discuss how the state distributes its electoral votes, a source with direct knowledge of the trip said.
Graham, acting on behalf of Trump’s campaign, tried to persuade Pillen to call a special legislative session in which lawmakers could consider changing the state’s distribution of electoral votes, the source told NBC News.
Proponents of the winner-take-all model would need 33 votes in the state Senate to overcome a filibuster and pass the change. While the state’s unicameral legislature is technically nonpartisan, Republicans do hold a 33-seat majority thanks to McDonnell’s recent party switch. But that slim margin means Republicans can’t move forward without him.
Pillen said he has not yet received “the concrete and public indication that 33 [state] Senators would vote for the winner-take-all system.
State lawmakers told the Nebraska Examiner last week that they estimated the change had the support of 30 or 31 state senators, meaning they were two to three votes short. McDonnell was one of them. State Sen. Merv Riepe was seen as another. The Washington Post reported last week that Riepe now supports the change to a winner-takes-all system.
The renewed interest in Nebraska’s electoral college votes comes months after Republicans tried, and failed, to push through the change this spring. At the time, a pressure campaign backed by Pillen, Trump and pro-Trump influencer Charlie Kirk failed on procedural grounds, as it lacked enough support from senators to overcome a filibuster.
Since the state changed the way it awards its electoral college votes more than 30 years ago, lawmakers have repeatedly tried to revert to awarding all of Nebraska’s votes to the statewide winner. An attempt to do so passed in 1995 but was vetoed by the governor. Another attempt in 2016 fell just one vote short.
Maine is the only other state that does not have a winner-takes-all system for electors. But while Maine Democrats have discussed changing their system if Nebraska were to make a change, they appear to be out of time to make a countermove before 2024.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
