Republicans step up effort to change Nebraska’s electoral vote process to benefit Trump

(WASHINGTON) — Republicans are stepping up their efforts to change Nebraska’s electoral vote process to winner-take-all — a move that would benefit former President Donald Trump in an expected close November election in which a single vote could make a key difference in the Electoral College.

The winner-take-all electoral change could be pivotal if the Republican-leaning state allocates all of its five electoral votes solely to Trump instead of dividing them with Kamala Harris.

Nebraska split its electoral votes in 2020, with President Joe Biden flipping the 2nd District, which includes the Democratic stronghold of Omaha.

Trump endorsed the winner-take-all system in April.

Pressure continues to grow on state lawmakers to as the state’s full federal delegation, all Republicans, and other national GOP figures continue to push for the change.

But amending Nebraska’s electoral college process is not simple.

Gov. Jim Pillen, a Republican, would have to convene a special legislative session. Pillen released a statement on Friday saying he would not call a session unless GOP legislators show they have 33 votes needed to break an expected Democratic filibuster.

Yet, state senators are not confident they have the votes; State Sen. Tom Berwer told the Nebraska Examiner he anticipates the group to come shy with 30 or 31 votes. That is a reason why Trump-ally Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina have been brought in to make the case. Graham flew to Nebraska Wednesday to meet with key stakeholders.

“I went and talked to some senators as the Governor. Senator [Pete] Ricketts and the Governor asked me to come out and to the caucus. I guess that’s what you call it, about the state of the play in the world and the consequences of the next election on a foreign policy front,” Graham told ABC News on Thursday.

“I hope they will allow winner-take-all. [Splitting electoral votes] was created in ’92 to help Clinton. Trump’s going to win the state by 20 points. You know, I told the conference, I’ve never seen so many challenges and threats to our country as I do now. I think she would make things worse,” he said, referring to Harris. “I was glad to go out and talk about the world as I see it, and I hope the people in Nebraska that this may come down to a single electoral vote,” he added.

Ricketts told reporters at the U.S. Capitol later on Thursday that he encouraged Graham to go to Nebraska to push for winner-take-all. “I think Senator Graham is a great spokesperson for it, he is very savvy about why we need to make sure that all of our voters have an opportunity to have their voices heard on what the other states are doing,” he said.

All five members of Nebraska’s federal delegation — all Republicans — joined together on Wednesday night, penning a letter to vouch for the change. The letter — signed by GOP Reps. Mike Flood, Don Bacon, Adrian Smith and Republican Sens. Deb Fischer and Ricketts — said the state should “speak with a united voice in presidential elections.”

“We need a President that will represent all of us, from Omaha to Scottsbluff and everywhere in-between. Senators and Governors are elected by the state as a whole because they represent all of the people of Nebraska equally, and the state should speak with a united voice in presidential elections as well. After all, we are Nebraskans first, not members of Nebraska’s three congressional districts,” the letter reads.

Kate Heltzel, a spokesperson for the Nebraska legislature outlined the legislative process that would need to unfold in order to implement the change.

“A senator would introduce a bill once the special session convenes, which likely would be referenced to the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee, which would then hold a public hearing. If the bill is advanced by the committee, it would move to the floor of the Legislature and would need to advance through three rounds of debate before final passage. There is no set time frame for how long a special session lasts — that is up to the senators after it begins — except that the process requires a minimum of seven days for a bill to move from introduction to final passage, based on constitutionally required layover days between rounds of debate, etc.”

Some members mentioned to the Examiner that Trump himself may begin to make calls on the matter. ABC News is awaiting a response from Trump campaign.

However, if Pillen does call a special session, and members are able to break a filibuster, changes can be enacted quickly. According to Nebraska’s deputy secretary of state, Cindi Allen, “If winner-take-all is passed by the legislature before the election, barring any challenges, winner-take-all would go into effect.” This applies to any time in the election cycle. Even after early voting starts on Oct. 7. The secretary’s office confirmed that if there are no legal challenges, the Nebraska legislature could push the change through at the very last minute, on Nov. 2 or 3, for example.

Kate Heltzel, a spokesperson for the Nebraska legislature, sees more of a gray area.

“Some argue that the rule cannot be changed after general election voting begins in Nebraska. In-person early voting begins 30 days before an election, or Oct. 7 this year. Others contend that the only requirement is that the law be changed before Electoral College members cast their votes in December. To my knowledge, the attorney general has not officially weighed in on the issues, so I don’t have a definitive answer,” she wrote.

ABC News’ Allison Pecorin contributed to this report.