GUEST COLUMN BY ROBERT FRAMPTON
Nebraska is understood to be a deep red state. So, it was something of a shock when a new
poll was released the last week of September that indicated that US Senator Deb Fischer,
running for a third term, is neck-and-neck with an Independent candidate, Dan Osborn. In fact, the latest poll indicating a close race came that week from SurveyUSA and was funded by Osborn’s campaign. It surveyed 558 likely Nebraska voters Sept. 20-23, with a mix of cell phone, landline phone and other digital devices. It indicated Osborn with a 45%-44% lead, well within the poll’s 4.8% margin of error. It was the sixth poll released publicly to indicate the race is competitive.
So, who is Dan Osborn? Dan graduated from Roncalli Catholic High School in Manitowoc,
Wisconsin, in 1994. Following in his father’s footsteps, Dan joined the United States Navy and served for 4 years as an SK (Storekeeper) aboard the USS Constellation CV-64, completing two Western Pacific cruises and two Rimpac cruises. Dan then joined the Nebraska Army National Guard. He attended the 19K Tanker school in Boise, Idaho and moved to Knoxville, TN, serving time in the Tennessee National Guard before returning to Nebraska. Dan began work as an industrial mechanic at the Kellogg plant in Omaha in 2004. Dan rose to the presidency of his union, Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers (BCTGM). He led the successful 2021 Kellogg’s strike in Omaha, defeating efforts to slash benefits and guaranteeing that the factory remains open through 2026. After the strike he was fired from his job at Kellogg.
Highlighting his military service, Osborn says he believes the government should increase military pay and provide job training for veterans, saying, “Those who serve our country should not be left behind when they return home.” Osborn says he opposes “efforts to legislate how private citizens should conduct themselves” and that he would support gun ownership, advocate for legalizing marijuana, and oppose national legislation on abortion.
According to Nebraska Democratic Party Chair Jane Kleeb, the party decided not run a
candidate after talks with Osborn. Osborn says he will not accept endorsements from any
political parties but that he would “take endorsements from small businesses, from veterans,
from unions, from normal people.”
Debra Lynelle Fischer (née Strobel; born March 1, 1951) is a former educator serving as the
senior United States senator from Nebraska, a seat she has held since 2013. A member of
the Republican Party, Fischer is the third woman to represent Nebraska in the U.S. Senate
(after Eva Bowring and Hazel Abel) and the first to be reelected. Deb Fischer and her husband, Bruce Fischer, own a cattle ranch, inherited from Bruce’s parents. From 1990 to 2004, Deb Fischer served on the Valentine Rural High School Board of Education.
In 2004, she was elected to the Nebraska Unicameral Legislature, representing the 43rd district for two terms, from 2005 to 2013. Fischer ran for the U.S. Senate in 2012 and was initially seen as a long-shot candidate, but pulled off an unexpected victory against state attorney general Jon Bruning in the Republican primary; in the general election, she defeated
former Democratic U.S. Senator Bob Kerrey and was the only Republican to flip a Senate seat in the 2012 elections. Bob Kerrey had served as the 35th governor of Nebraska from 1983 to 1987 and as a United States Senator from Nebraska from 1989 to 2001.
In the 1989 general election, Kerrey defeated the appointed Republican incumbent, David Karnes 57% to 42%. Kerrey won re-election to a second term, defeating businesswoman Jan Stoney 55% to 45%. Kerrey retired from the Senate in 2000 and was replaced by former governor and fellow Democrat Ben Nelson, who won 51% of the vote over Republican state Attorney General Don Steinberg; and Nelson was reelected in 2006, defeating Pete Ricketts 64%-36%. He did not run for a third term in 2012, and was succeeded by Republican Deb Fischer.
After leaving the Senate, Kerrey became President of the New School for Social Research in
New York City, where he served until 2010. He then returned to Nebraska to run for the Senate in 2012 against Deb Fischer. So, we can see that Nebraska has not always been a deep red state. In fact, Nebraska in the past has been at the center of the Progressive movement. The long career of Senator George Norris is illustrative of this. I have previously written reviews of four book on Nebraska politics, including two on Senator Norris. Reviews of the other two books are printed below:
Book Reviews:
“Rural Rebellion: How Nebraska Became a Republican Stronghold” by Ross Benes; and
“Harvest the Vote: How Democrats Can Win Again in Rural America” by Jane Kleeb.
By Robert V Frampton: Once the land of progressive populism, electing progressive leaders like William Jennings Bryan and Senator George W. Norris, Nebraska has forgotten its liberal past as it became a Republican stronghold. Other largely rural states, North and South Dakota, Wyoming, Iowa and Idaho, similarly are now very conservative “red” states. But, in the recent past, these states have elected Democratic senators and governors: Bob Kerrey, John James Exon, and Ben Nelson were Democratic senators and governors of
Nebraska; George McGovern, Tim Johnson and Tom Daschle were senators from South Dakota; Kent Conrad, Byron Dorgan and Heidi Heitkamp were senators from North Dakota; John Culver and Tom Harkin were senators from Iowa, and Gale McGee was senator from Wyoming.
Republican Nebraska Senator George Norris was allied with Teddy Roosevelt’s Bull Moose party and championed the Rural Electrification Act and the Tennessee Valley Authority, and supported FDR’s New Deal. Nebraska Republican senator Chuck Hagel sponsored the Dream Act of 2005 and later became Obama’s Secretary of Defense. Further back, Nebraska was the center of the People’s Party and the Agrarian movement,
and home of William Jennings Bryan, three-time Democratic presidential nominee.
This all began to change nationally in 1980 with the election of Ronald Reagan. Still, in 1989, Nebraska had two Democratic US Senators; and Sen. James Exon served until 1997. But the last competitive contest for Nebraska governor was that of Bill Hoppner, in 1998, and he gained only 46% of the vote. Since then, Democratic candidates for governor have polled in the 30s. The book “Rural Rebellion” by journalist Ross Benes, a native Nebraskan, examines this transition in Nebraska.
One factor in this transition was the development of abortion and immigration as wedge issues. Prior to the 1980s abortion was not a partisan issue; pro-life and pro-choice voters were in both parties. Senator Exon, for example, embraced anti-abortion policies. But in the ‘90s abortion became a prominent “wedge” issue: Senator Sasse, along with other Republicans, emotionalized the abortion issue. And national democrats began to use it as a litmus test. Benes relates the 2017 contest for non-partisan Mayor of Omaha, where moderate Democratic state senator Heath Mello, who was focusing on fixing the streets, was attacked by DNC Chair Tom Perez for not being sufficiently pro-choice, and DNC support
was discontinued, even though the role of mayor has no influence over abortion legislation. The State Party Chair Jane Kleeb was not consulted in advance of Perez’ decision. Benes comments: “The outrage over Mello’s legislative voting record is emblematic of how liberal activists want one-size-fits-all candidates”, that is, passing a liberal litmus test.
In general, a rural vs. urban divide has developed in the United States, a divide that did not exist during the early 19th Century days of the Agrarian Progressive movement – of figures like George W. Norris, William Jennings Bryan, Thomas J. Walsh, and Bob Lafollette. This rural-urban divide has led to a red-blue divide in the past 30 years. This divide has led to many “rural” states such as Nebraska, to be “written off” by the national Democratic party.
This is the subject of Jane Kleeb’s book. In “Harvest the Vote,” Jane Kleeb, Chair of the Nebraska Democratic Party, makes the case for investment in rural areas and in red states, echoing the 50-state effort (now abandoned) under DNC Chair Howard Dean. The national environmental groups focused their efforts in DC; but it was the local organizing that brought together farmers and ranchers with tribal communities to confront economic and environmental issues that affect both rural and urban voters. Jane Kleeb tells the story of the grass roots opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline, for which she was one of the organizers.
The opposition centered on a local coalition of farmers and native American tribes. A main concern to the farmers, ranchers, and tribes was the issue of eminent domain, by which TransCanada, the developer of the pipeline, could go to court to force the sale of farm and ranch land for the route of the pipeline. These local rural communities understood the potential environmental damage that the pipeline could cause, and had the most to lose.
These farmers, ranchers and native Americans came together to organize the
Cowboy and Indian Alliance (taking the name of a similar past organization that had fought against uranium mining in the Black Hills). One symbolic tool was the introduction of the Ponca Sacred Corn, cultivated by the Ponca Nation of Oklahoma, that had been displaced from Nebraska to Oklahoma 130 year earlier. The Ponca corn was planted in ritual planting ceremonies in the path of the pipeline. Kleeb writes, “We know the corn stands for us when we are not there. We know we must plant seeds of resistance both literally and figuratively if we are going to protect rural communities. The resiliency of farmers and ranchers, their families, and tribal nations cannot easily be put into words. Perhaps that is why a single seed of corn speaks best for us.” It is the love for the land, shared by farmers, ranchers, and tribe members, that brought together this movement to successfully oppose the construction of the XL Pipeline.
Kleeb concludes, “The old Democratic playbook must be thrown out in order to win again in rural communities. We have to believe, because it’s true, that there are brilliant people on the ground who understand their state and communities and who can win elections. Just as with the XL fight, rural states will need partnerships with national groups. Rural leaders in the Democratic party can explain the policies rural people need trumpeted, issues like market consolidation, the right to repair, and eminent domain abuse. We can show the grassroots approach we take to reach voters where they are, including rodeo, sale barns, and churches.” But the Democratic party needs to invest in, and not ignore, rural America. It is, perhaps, emblematic that this latest Senate campaign in Nebraska, which is showing surprising strength, features an Independent candidate rather than a Democrat.
References:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF6bzfUFBJc&t=606s Interview with Dan Osborn
conservatives-nervous-super-pac-1235110892
Kommentare