Anti-Abortion Forces Used Deceptive Tactics to Defeat Nebraska Ballot Measure

This election was painful for so many across the country, and while some celebrated victories for reproductive rights, others — like us in Nebraska — watched a crucial opportunity slip away.

On Nov. 5, I sat in my living room surrounded by my community, watching a tightly contested ballot measure to protect abortion access in Nebraska slowly fall out of reach. In the months leading up to this election, Nebraska faced two competing ballot initiatives. The first, Initiative 439, sought to amend the state constitution to protect abortion access up to fetal viability. The second, Measure 434, aimed to cement Nebraska’s 12-week abortion ban as state law. This situation — two dueling abortion measures on the same ballot — was unprecedented and only made possible through millions of dollars poured into a national, state-level strategy to confuse voters through a deceptive media blitz. Nebraska voters ultimately rejected the opportunity to secure access to abortion up to viability, instead approving an amendment enshrining the state’s restrictive 12-week abortion ban into our constitution.

As executive director of the statewide abortion fund Nebraska Abortion Resources (NEAR), it’s my responsibility to stay grounded in our values and make the best decisions I can to help protect access for as many Nebraskans as possible. This role also gives me a front-row seat to the often-overlooked battles in this part of the country. And let me tell you: The path leading up to this election and the deceptive tactics employed by anti-abortion forces here in Nebraska demand closer examination. This wasn’t just a Nebraska loss; it was a victory for anti-abortion strategies. The anti-abortion movement’s desperation to gain ground amidst a national outpouring of support for abortion access brings ballot measure after ballot measure in front of voters—and what happened in Nebraska will soon be replicated in other states.

What happened in Nebraska’s election was a coordinated effort to sow confusion. Anti-abortion groups, led by figures like Nebraska Sen. Pete Ricketts, poured millions into a campaign that blurred the lines between pro-choice and anti-abortion positions. They co-opted our language, our logo, and our fonts; they strategically used phrases like “reproductive rights are human rights.” Petitioners were even caught directly lying to voters by telling them that signing the anti-abortion petition would protect their right to access abortion. Playing off the energy felt by Initiative 439, the anti-abortion movement deliberately stifled our efforts by collecting pro-choice signatures and making voters think they had already done their part to secure abortion access so they wouldn’t duplicate and sign for Initiative 439. They didn’t care if voters understood which measure did what; their only goal was confusion. Hundreds of voters came forward to have their names removed from the “wrong” petition, but it was too late. Ads ran on every platform throughout the campaign phase, claiming that voting against the viability measure would protect Nebraskans from government interference in abortion care. This was gaslighting on a massive scale, and it succeeded. In the end, the initiative failed to pass, while Measure 434, the amendment cementing the 12-week ban, narrowly succeeded.

Watching this manipulation unfold felt surreal. The anti-abortion movement knew what they were doing, and they used deceptive tactics to prey on voters’ genuine desire to protect reproductive rights. Our measure gathered more than 207,000 signatures, the largest single petition drive in Nebraska history — and over 400,000 Nebraskans voted for it in a state often thought of as holding traditional Republican values. But with millions in anti-abortion funding and relentless media disinformation, the confusion campaign overwhelmed voters and stifled our attempts at progress.

This experience holds urgent lessons for the rest of the country. What happened in Nebraska won’t stay in Nebraska. This was a test case for a more formal strategy of the same old gaslighting and deception, exploiting vulnerable states where the often-ignored population are written off and don’t garner much national attention no matter how loud they shout.

I can’t help but wonder what more could’ve been done if Nebraska received even half the attention that poured into other states. We saw a flood of national resources flowing to “hot button” states, while Nebraska scrambled to make the most of limited grassroots support until it was too late. It’s heartbreaking to know that our situation could have turned out differently if people took Nebraska seriously.

As a born-and-raised Midwesterner, I know that states like ours are constantly overlooked in national conversations — especially regarding social issues. Flyover country is rarely given a major spotlight, which allows anti-abortion political forces to advance their agenda with little scrutiny. National media often focuses on states where abortion access is either entirely protected or fully eliminated, missing the reality that the Midwest is still a battleground where every single restriction is crucial. Our election was as significant as any swing-state race, yet for many, this is likely the first time they’re hearing about it.

The road to this election was anything but straightforward. I had to wrestle with my values to decide whether to support Initiative 439. I’ve always believed in free, unobstructed access to abortion. I don’t believe the government should have a say in a person’s right to any pregnancy outcome. But given Nebraska’s legislative climate and the immediate threat of a six-week abortion ban, it was clear that supporting this initiative was the right thing to do to keep abortion moderately accessible in our region and to make sure my organization’s constituency was represented in campaign leadership. So, with no promises from the legislature to protect access, we moved forward in support.

During the signature collection phase, I gathered signatures from people who shared their personal stories and fears about what was at stake. Some had never said the word “abortion” out loud before, let alone shared their story. Those conversations were powerful reminders of why we fight for each other. Politicians want to project an antiquated image of religious piety on states like ours, but Nebraskans are as diverse as any community, and we experience unexpected pregnancies and unforeseen complications, just like everyone else. We also have complex and nuanced lives and deserve the right to determine our futures.

Nebraskans have spent countless legislative sessions fighting bans and restrictions that threaten our bodily autonomy. Last year, we narrowly defeated a six-week abortion ban in our unicameral legislature by a single vote, only to see anti-abortion politicians sneak a 12-week ban into an unrelated health care bill targeting trans rights. These politicians have repeatedly shown that they’re willing to bypass fair process to advance their agenda.

Meanwhile, the fallout from the Dobbs decision is felt acutely here in Nebraska, especially in rural areas where people already face enormous obstacles to accessing abortion care. Many Nebraskans must travel more than six hours to Minnesota or even farther to Illinois or Colorado. These journeys come with high costs, including travel, lodging, childcare, and time off work, leaving low-income individuals and people of color disproportionately affected. This logistical nightmare is by design. The anti-abortion movement wants to make access so complicated, so costly, that people simply give up.

We cannot ignore the lessons of this election. The confusion campaign, media manipulation, and gaslighting we experienced here are part of a broader anti-abortion strategy. Emboldened by their “success,” Ricketts and other conservative leaders are eager to bring this model to every state where abortion access has support but lives under a red-state shadow. Heed my warning: If the anti-abortion movement continues to be successful in stifling abortion rights through unchecked, blatant deception here, they will replicate their tactics everywhere.

The recent election was a sobering reminder that we must stay vigilant — especially in places where big-money interests seek to overshadow the voices of the people. NEAR will continue to support Nebraskans, providing resources, reducing barriers, and speaking out against the lies that have taken hold. However, we need national allies who understand that states like Nebraska are more than just flyover country. We’re a frontline.

As we look ahead, the next wave of the fight for reproductive rights requires national attention in states like ours. When legislative majorities work against the will of the people, ballot initiatives become a crucial avenue for change. Anti-abortion leaders know this, which is why they’re weaponizing confusion to undermine our democracy.

Prism is an independent and nonprofit newsroom led by journalists of color. We report from the ground up and at the intersections of injustice.