Nebraska Republican Rep. Don Bacon cites political dysfunction in deciding not to seek reelection
OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — U.S. Rep. Don Bacon, a Republican from Nebraska, announced Monday he will not seek reelection next year amid an increasingly polarized political climate.
Bacon, 61, said at a news conference at Omaha's airport that he would not seek a sixth term representing Nebraska's second district with its so-called blue dot that includes many progressive voters around Omaha.
Bacon has had to navigate an ever-thinning line between staying in his party's and President Donald Trump's good graces without alienating his increasingly Democratic district.
In May at an Omaha roundtable with business leaders to discuss Congress' recent tax bill, Bacon said he would decide 'by this summer' whether he would run again, citing a desire to spend more time with his family, including his eight grandchildren. When pressed, he acknowledged that the dysfunction in Washington contributed to his decision.
'It's one thing when you have the opposing party fighting you, but when you have divisions in your own party, you know — it makes it harder,' he said.
An Air Force veteran first elected in 2016, he won reelection in 2024. He serves on the House Armed Services Committee and has been at the center of many debates in Congress. He has also been chairman of the conservative-centrist Republican Main Street Caucus in the House.
Bacon has earned a reputation as a centrist — an increasingly rare designation among Republicans as the party has moved farther to the right. But he has long acknowledged that moderation is a necessary attribute for anyone seeking to represent the Omaha-centered district, which is closely divided between Republican and Democratic voters.
Nebraska is one of two states that doesn't follow a winner-take-all system of awarding Electoral College votes. Instead, Nebraska and Maine allow presidential electoral votes to be split by congressional district. Bacon's district has seen its elector vote go to a Democratic presidential candidate three times — to Barack Obama in 2008, to Joe Biden in 2020 and to Kamala Harris in 2024.
The political climate is rapidly changing in Omaha, where voters recently rejected a fourth term for Republican Mayor Jean Stothert in favor of her Democratic opponent, John Ewing.
Seeing an opportunity to flip a vulnerable seat, several Democrats have already announced their candidacy. The most widely recognized is John Cavanaugh, a state senator from Omaha who's father, John J. Cavanaugh III, represented the 2nd District in Congress from 1977 to 1981.
Bacon has managed to survive the district's swing to the left by staying squarely in the middle. In his most recent campaigns, he touted his bipartisan credentials in political ads and cited his willingness to buck his party to support measures such as the Biden administration's popular 2021 infrastructure investment bill.
Despite Bacon's willingness to rebuke both his party and the Trump administration, he has consistently voted with most of their agenda. But his criticism of Trump has been enough to draw the growing ire of his party. Bacon faced a primary challenger in 2024 who was endorsed by the Nebraska Republican Party, which is led by Trump loyalists.
Even so, Bacon has grown more vocal in his criticism of the Trump administration. That includes the president's chaotic tariff policies, with Bacon going so far as to introduce a bill to return authority to issue tariffs to Congress.
On Sunday, Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina also decided to not seek reelection next year. He had held to his opposition of President Donald Trump's tax breaks and spending cuts package because of its reductions to health care programs.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Magazine
27 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
What to Know About Medicaid
Medicaid, the health insurance program for low-income Americans that provides coverage for more than 70 million people, faces its biggest overhaul in decades under President Donald Trump's 'One, Big, Beautiful Bill,' a massive tax and spending package now being considered by the Senate that would slash its funding. Both the House and Senate versions of the bill, which is still undergoing changes as the upper chamber votes on amendments, would reduce funding for the program by hundreds of billions of dollars, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Nearly 12 million adults could lose health insurance because of the proposed cuts in the Senate's revised bill over the next decade, the CBO estimated in a Saturday report. Much of the cuts are expected to come through imposing new administrative requirements on enrollees, or risk losing their coverage. The White House has rejected the CBO's findings, insisting that the cuts to the program will only reduce fraud and waste. 'President Trump pledged to protect and preserve Medicaid, and that's exactly what The One, Big, Beautiful accomplishes by kicking illegal immigrants off the program, implementing commonsense work requirements, and enforcing basic eligibility verification to combat fraud,' White House spokesman Kush Desai wrote to TIME. The House narrowly passed the bill in May, and lawmakers are now working in an effort to pass the proposed legislation by a July 4 deadline imposed by Trump. The proposed Medicaid cuts have been contentious among Republicans, some of whom have been wary of their potential impact. Senator Thom Tillis, a Republican of North Carolina, has vowed to vote against the bill unless his concerns over the cuts are addressed. Here's what to know about Medicaid. What is Medicaid? Medicaid was created following the passage of the 1965 Social Security Amendments under President Lyndon B. Johnson, according to the National Archives. The law established both Medicare, which generally provides health insurance coverage for Americans aged 65 and older, and Medicaid, which serves low-income people. Medicaid is financed jointly by state and federal governments and accounts for about a sixth of health care spending in the U.S. It's a hugely popular program among Americans: More than 80% have a positive view of Medicaid, according to a survey conducted earlier this month by nonpartisan research organization KFF. The Affordable Care Act enabled states to expand Medicaid eligibility to include non-elderly adults whose income was up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level—a national median of $44,367 for a family of four this year. Forty states and Washington, D.C., have so far adopted the expansion, 90% of which is funded by the federal government. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress allocated additional Medicaid funds so recipients could maintain "continuous coverage,' requiring states to keep most people enrolled in the program regardless of income in exchange for the enhanced federal funding. Continuous enrollment concluded at the end of March 2023, and an 'unwinding' process began. Some states have alternative names for Medicaid, such as DenaliCare in Alaska, KanCare in Kansas, and SoonerCare in Oklahoma. How many people are enrolled in Medicaid? Medicaid enrollment has stood at around 20% of the total U.S. population for the last several years, the Pew Research Center reports. Some 71.3 million low-income people in the U.S. were enrolled in the program in March 2025, more than half of whom were adults, according to a report from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). The figure was notably higher in recent years: Roughly 100 million people were enrolled in Medicaid at some point in 2023, according to a December 2024 report by The Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission. The numbers have declined following the end of continuous enrollment, however, as states have resumed disenrolling people from the program. The proportion of people enrolled in the program varies significantly between states. More than 30% of residents in Louisiana and New Mexico are covered by Medicaid, according to KFF, compared to just 12% in Wyoming and North Dakota. Who is eligible for Medicaid? The federal government sets broad eligibility requirements for Medicaid. It requires states to cover some groups when they fall below certain income levels, including pregnant women, families with children, disabled people, and most children in foster care. But since the program is state-administered, Medicaid qualifications vary on a state-by-state basis. For instance, some immigrants may be eligible for coverage in states such as New Jersey or New York. One of the provisions in the Senate version of Trump's tax and spending bill was intended to cut federal funding to states that use Medicaid to provide health care to undocumented immigrants. However, that part of the bill is in limbo after the Senate parliamentarian found that the measure did not comply with Senate rules. Are Medicaid recipients required to work? Current regulations in most states do not require Medicaid recipients to work. In Georgia, however, applicants are required to prove that they completed at least 80 hours of work or volunteer services to receive coverage. Because of this verification system, a ProPublica report found that Georgia enrolled only a fraction of Medicaid-eligible people: some 7,500 of the estimated 250,000 eligible residents. Attempts to implement work requirements in Arkansas were struck down by a federal court in 2019. A federal judge blocked similar requirements in Kentucky from taking effect the previous year, and Governor Andy Beshear halted efforts to impose them in 2019 shortly after taking office. Idaho, Kentucky, and Indiana have adopted legislation to impose work requirements this year, according to KFF. Other states are weighing imposing similar measures. And potential work requirements are being considered on a federal level in Trump's 'One, Big, Beautiful Bill.' The package would require Medicaid recipients from ages 19 to 64 to verify that they work at least 80 hours a month, or are training for a new job, studying, or volunteering. People's work status would be checked twice a year. Most working-age adults on Medicaid are employed, or have a disability or caregiving responsibilities, according to KFF.
Newsweek
27 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Indian Immigrants Get Break as Senate Bill Waters Down Remittance Tax
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Indian nationals in the United States who send money back home are cautiously celebrating a move by Senate Republicans to cut down a planned tax on the funds. In revisions of so-called Big Beautiful Bill making its way through the Senate, a tax on remittances, which passed the House of Representatives at 5 percent, was cut to 3.5 percent and then further to 1 percent. It is also now limited to only certain money transfers. The U.S. sent $80 billion in outward remittances in 2022, according to the World Bank, making it the largest sender of remittances in the world. India is the world's top receiver of remittances. Under the legislation, immigrants who send wages home via wire transfers will still be taxed, though money sent via banks will now be exempt. That would be welcome news for high-earning, short-term migrants, such as tech workers from India. A Western Union sign is seen inside a Sedano's store in Miami, Florida, on January 12, 2023. A Western Union sign is seen inside a Sedano's store in Miami, Florida, on January 12, 2023. EVA MARIE UZCATEGUI/AFP via Getty Images "Their families back here in India are already good financially. So, it's not that they're very actively dependent on the money that's being sent from here," Alok Dubey, a financial advisor and chief executive officer of PrimeWealth in India, told Newsweek. "The people who are much relieved are the guys who eventually wanted to come back sometime. "It might be two years, it might be five years, it might be 10 years. So, they are the guys who are more relieved as compared to somebody who sends his wages for the family to take care of themselves here in India." Why It Matters A tax on remittances was framed as a way to recoup some of the money immigrant workers send back home and keep it circulating within the U.S. economy. In 2023, the last full year of data available, over $650 billion was received in remittances by countries worldwide, with around a third of that coming from the U.S. In some countries, remittances from the U.S. account for full percentage points of their GDP. Watering down the remittance tax will come as a blow to those on the right calling for tougher measures around immigration, both legal and illegal. What To Know There were warnings when President Donald Trump's budget bill was in the House of Representatives that the original 5 percent remittance tax would have significant impacts on the receiving nations. India received over $119.5 billion in remittances from its citizens around the world in 2023, according to the Indian government. Nearly 30 percent of that is believed to come from the 2 million Indian nationals living and working in the U.S. The country has also seen one of the steadiest rises in remittances, according to World Bank data, with experts saying these funds provide a lifeline for immigrants' families back home. Remittance money is often used to cover utilities, housing costs, and groceries, but can also be used as investments. Under the version of the bill currently up for a vote in the Senate, the 1 percent tax would only apply to cash or physical payments handed to money transfer providers, and not payments made through bank accounts or payment cards. This is a change from the House version of the bill, which taxed all remittances at 5 percent. The Immigration Accountability Project (IAJ), which advocates for tougher immigration reform, has expressed its dismay at the cutbacks to the initial measure, telling Newsweek that it will be a loss in revenue for the U.S. "Republican Senators seem to be more afraid of the lobbyist from big banks than they are of those from Western Union and MoneyGram. That's the only thing that that I can see," Chris Chmielenski, President of the IAJ told Newsweek. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) initially estimated around $22 billion per year could be raised through the 5 percent tax. At 1 percent, that figure is now well below $10 billion. The IAJ argues this is tax revenue not generated by American citizens, which the federal government will now miss out on. Dubey told Newsweek that many wealthy Indian immigrants split their financial assets, with roughly 70 percent staying in the U.S. and 30 percent going back to India. Since the first proposal of a remittance tax, there has been a steady outflow of money from the U.S. as immigrants look to avoid taxation at a later time when they head home for good. Removing the requirement for remittance taxes on bank transfers, where larger assets may be stored, will likely take the pressure off the money immigrants are storing in U.S. accounts awaiting a later transfer, but Dubey said large sums have likely already been moved without the tax in place. What People Are Saying Chris Chmielenski of IAJ, speaking to Newsweek: "I'm pretty disappointed with the developments which have occurred. Disappointed, not just because you know this this is a potential stream of revenue that I don't think a whole lot of Americans are going to really complain about. I think they would view it as somewhat reasonable to be taxing money sent back to foreign money earned here in the United States that's sent out of the country to foreign countries." Alok Dubey, of PrimeWealth, speaking to Newsweek: "I don't think it's going to stop someone from coming, even if you pay 3.5 percent. The opportunities in the U.S. and just the currency is so high. Let's say I was saving $1,000 and I'm saving just $30 less, then it doesn't create that difference, because if I convert things to my currency, it's a very big amount." U.S. Tech Workers, part of The Institute for Sound Public Policy, on X: "Senate Republicans are watering down the remittance tax from 3.5% to just 1%. House GOP BBB passed 5%, but the Senate caves — again! So, H-1Bs replace American workers, then get rewarded for wiring U.S. wages to countries profiting off our offshored jobs. Absolute betrayal!" What's Next The tax bill is still working its way through the Senate. If passed, it would head back to the House for a final vote as part of the reconciliation process before going to President Trump's desk.
Associated Press
28 minutes ago
- Associated Press
What's in the latest version of Trump's big bill moving through the Senate
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans are inching closer to getting their tax and spending cut bill through Congress with a final Senate vote likely late Monday or early Tuesday. At some 940-pages, the legislation is a sprawling collection of tax breaks, spending cuts and other Republican priorities, including new money for national defense and deportations. President Donald Trump has admonished Republicans, who hold majority power in the House and Senate, to skip their holiday vacations and deliver the bill by the Fourth of July. Democrats are united against the legislation and were offering scores of amendments to alter it Monday as the Senate slogged through what is known as a vote-a-rama. Senators can offer an unlimited number of amendments, with each receiving a vote. Once the bill clears the Senate, it would have to pass the House before Trump can sign it into law. Here's the latest on what's in the bill. There could be changes as GOP lawmakers continue to negotiate. Tax cuts are the priority Republicans say the bill is crucial because there would be a massive tax increase after December when tax breaks from Trump's first term expire. The legislation contains about $4.5 trillion in tax cuts. The existing tax rates and brackets would become permanent under the bill. It temporarily would add new tax breaks that Trump campaigned on: no taxes on tips, overtime pay, the ability to deduct interest payments for some automotive loans, along with a $6,000 deduction for older adults who earn no more than $75,000 a year. It would boost the $2,000 child tax credit to $2,200. Millions of families at lower income levels would not get the full credit. A cap on state and local deductions, called SALT, would quadruple to $40,000 for five years. It's a provision important to New York and other high tax states, though the House wanted it to last for 10 years. There are scores of business-related tax cuts, including allowing businesses to immediately write off 100% of the cost of equipment and research. The wealthiest households would see a $12,000 increase from the legislation, which would cost the poorest people $1,600 a year, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office analysis of the House's version. Middle-income taxpayers would see a tax break of $500 to $1,500, the CBO said. Money for deportations, a border wall and the Golden Dome The bill would provide some $350 billion for Trump's border and national security agenda, including $46 billion for the U.S.-Mexico border wall and $45 billion for 100,000 migrant detention facility beds, as he aims to fulfill his promise of the largest mass deportation operation in U.S. history. Money would go for hiring 10,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, with $10,000 signing bonuses and a surge of Border Patrol officers, as well. The goal is to deport some 1 million people per year. The homeland security secretary would have a new $10 billion fund for grants for states that help with federal immigration enforcement and deportation actions. To help pay for it, immigrants would face various new fees, including when seeking asylum protections. For the Pentagon, the bill would provide billions for ship building, munitions systems, and quality of life measures for servicemen and women, as well as $25 billion for the development of the Golden Dome missile defense system. The Defense Department would have $1 billion for border security. How to pay for it? Cuts to Medicaid and other programs To help partly offset the lost tax revenue and new spending, Republicans aim to cut back on Medicaid and food assistance for the poor. Republicans argue they are trying to rightsize the safety net programs for the population they were initially designed to serve, mainly pregnant women, the disabled and children, and root out what they describe as waste, fraud and abuse. The package includes new 80-hour-a-month work requirements for many adults receiving Medicaid and food stamps, including older people up to age 65. Parents of children 14 and older would have to meet the program's work requirements. There's also a proposed new $35 co-payment that can be charged to patients using Medicaid services. More than 71 million people rely on Medicaid, which expanded under Obama's Affordable Care Act, and 40 million use the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program. Most already work, according to analysts. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 11.8 million more Americans would become uninsured by 2034 if the bill became law and 3 million more would not qualify for food stamps. The Senate proposes a $25 billion Rural Hospital Transformation Program to help offset reduced Medicaid dollars. It's a new addition, intended to win over holdout GOP senators and a coalition of House Republicans warning that the proposed Medicaid provider tax cuts would hurt rural hospitals. A 'death sentence' for clean energy? Republicans are proposing to dramatically roll back tax breaks designed to boost clean energy projects fueled by renewable sources such as energy and wind. The tax breaks were a central component of President Joe Biden's 2022 landmark bill focused on addressing climate change and lowering healthcare costs. Democratic Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden went so far as to call the GOP provisions a 'death sentence for America's wind and solar industries and an inevitable hike in utility bills.' Under the bill, a tax credit that subsidizes the production of electricity would be eliminated for any wind and solar plant not plugged into the grid by the end of 2027. But Republicans aren't just looking to roll back the tax breaks Biden put into place: they're also looking to add a tax for new wind and solar projects that use a certain percentage of components from China. A tax break for people who buy new or used electric vehicles would expire on Sept. 30 of this year, instead of at the end of 2032 under current law. Meanwhile, a tax credit for the production of critical materials will be expanded to include metallurgical coal used in steelmaking. Trump savings accounts and so, so much more A number of extra provisions reflect other GOP priorities. The House and Senate both have a new children's savings program, called Trump Accounts, with a potential $1,000 deposit from the Treasury. The Senate provided $40 million to establish Trump's long-sought 'National Garden of American Heroes.' There's a new excise tax on university endowments. A $200 tax on gun silencers and short-barreled rifles and shotguns was eliminated. One provision bars money to family planning providers, namely Planned Parenthood, while $88 million is earmarked for a pandemic response accountability committee. Another section expands the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, a hard-fought provision from GOP Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, for those impacted by nuclear development and testing. Billions would go for the Artemis moon mission and for exploration to Mars. The bill would deter states from regulating artificial intelligence by linking certain federal AI infrastructure money to maintaining a freeze. Seventeen Republican governors have asked GOP leaders to drop the provision. Additionally, a provision would increase the nation's debt limit, by $5 trillion, to allow continued borrowing to pay already accrued bills. What's the final cost? Altogether, the Congressional Budget Office projects that the bill would increase federal deficits over the next 10 years by nearly $3.3 trillion from 2025 to 2034. Or not, depending on how one does the math. Senate Republicans are proposing a unique strategy of not counting the existing tax breaks as a new cost because those breaks are already 'current policy.' Republican senators say the Senate Budget Committee chairman has the authority to set the baseline for the preferred approach. Under the alternative Senate GOP view, the bill would reduce deficits by almost a half-trillion dollars over the coming decade, the CBO said. Democrats say this is 'magic math' that obscures the true costs of the tax breaks. Some nonpartisan groups worried about the country's fiscal trajectory are siding with Democrats in that take. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget says Senate Republicans are employing an 'accounting gimmick that would make Enron executives blush.'
