The Democratic primary for Nebraska’s second congressional district has attracted more than $5.6 million in outside ad spending.
Those millions, mostly from political action committees, have largely funded advertising supporting Denise Powell and opposing John Cavanaugh – two of the apparent frontrunners in the contentious, crowded primary race to face off with sole Republican candidate Brinker Harding in November.
The Nebraska district, sometimes called the “blue dot,” is seen as a key pickup opportunity for Democrats in the midterms. With five-term Rep. Don Bacon opting not to run for reelection, the Cook Political Report and Sabato’s Crystal Ball rank the district as leaning Democratic.
“It hasn’t really been competitive like this in more than a generation,” Randy Adkins, a political science professor at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, or UNO, said of the primary race. “The fact that so much money is coming in this year is very unique.”
The influx of outside money has led some to decry the spending as “dark money.” And it’s led to far more negative advertising than is typical in a Nebraska congressional primary.
Huchen Liu, a fellow political science professor at UNO, said the primary race checks all the boxes for outside interests to get involved: Bacon was a popular incumbent, and his retirement gives Democrats an opening. It’s a true swing district, as evidenced by 2nd District voters re-electing Bacon even as they awarded a single electoral vote to Democratic presidential candidates in 2020 and 2024. Liu said it’s unclear if President Donald Trump’s endorsement of Harding will help or hurt him.
“Given these fundamentals, in such a close election, it matters a great deal which candidate the two parties nominate for the general election,” Liu said. “That creates a lot of reason, a lot of incentive, for national groups – groups outside the district and outside the state – to get in and try to swing the primary election in favor of certain candidates.”
Big spending starts in March
The outside spending from PACs comes in the form of independent expenditures, defined by the Federal Election Commission as a communication “that expressly advocates the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate and which is not made in coordination with any candidate or their campaign or political party.”
Candidates can’t directly coordinate with PACs. But many candidates in tough races on either side of the aisle, including Cavanaugh and Powell, engage in a practice called “red-boxing” by outlining messaging priorities on public campaign websites that are often utilized by PACs in their ads.
By late April, both Cavanaugh and Powell highlighted attacks on the other as a key messaging priority.
In the Nebraska race, the independent expenditures mostly come from Super PACs and Hybrid PACs. Both types of PACs can raise unlimited money to make independent expenditures, but Hybrid PACs can also contribute directly to candidates.
The biggest spender is Fight for Nebraska PAC, a Nebraska-based Super PAC created in March that has spent more than $1.2 million on ads supporting Powell and $653,000 on ads opposing Cavanaugh. It’s also been the subject of online speculation, since an initial FEC filing listed an address for the PAC linked to Omaha philanthropist Katie Weitz. Weitz’s husband, Tim Wilson, is listed as the PAC’s treasurer.
An updated FEC filing changed the listed address to a P.O. box. Weitz did not respond to an email seeking comment on her involvement in the PAC. Members of the Weitz family are prolific Democratic donors in Omaha and across Nebraska.
The top donors to Fight for Nebraska PAC are two other PACs – the Way Back PAC and The Bench PAC. It also received smaller donations from the Western Futures Fund, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit that does not disclose any information about its donors, and a 501(c)(3) nonprofit called Global Impact. Western Futures Fund is also a major donor to Way Back PAC.
The Way Back PAC primarily contributes to other PACs, but as a Hybrid PAC, it also gives directly to candidates – mostly in Alaska, Iowa and Nebraska. The Way Back PAC gave smaller amounts to Powell and to independent Nebraska Senate candidate Dan Osborn. The Bench PAC is also a Hybrid PAC and primarily makes large contributions to other PACs.
In April, PAC spending balloons
For most of March, Fight for Nebraska was the only PAC running ads in the race. But by early April, the field got much more crowded. As of May 8, FEC records show 11 PACs in addition to Fight for Nebraska spent money on advertising in the primary race.
The vast majority of the spending went into ads supporting Powell and opposing Cavanaugh. The anti-Cavanaugh advertising largely focuses on fears that a Cavanaugh win would solidify a Republican supermajority in the state legislature. Cavanaugh currently represents a safely Democratic district in central Omaha, and his term ends in 2028.
Democrats and progressive independents currently hold 16 seats in the officially nonpartisan unicameral. To offset the loss of Cavanaugh’s seat if he is sent to Washington, Democrats are looking to flip at least one Republican-held seat. In an interview, Cavanaugh said he is “more confident now than I’ve been at any point” in Democrats’ chances to make those gains.
Cavanaugh said the prevalence of negative ads has boosted his profile in the district, which he’s hoping to spin into a positive.
“People, so many of them, the reason they recognize me when I walk to the door is because of negative ads,” Cavanaugh said. “So the opportunity [for voters] to ask about them, and when I get to explain the truth to them, they go from undecided to emphatically in my camp. It’s always great when I get to have a conversation with people that actually feels like it impacts the election.”
Powell, too, said voters will sometimes say they’ve seen her face on TV when she goes door-knocking. And though she said some are put off by the large amount of outside money pouring into the race, Powell said most voters are more concerned with day-to-day issues than the infighting.
“It’s a shame that this sort of negative mud-flinging stuff in this last week is taking up so much space,” she said. “I think it’s a distraction from what the real issues are. And I just don’t think voters like it, or, you know, feel good about it.”
New PACs continued to get involved in the race in the final weeks of campaigning. On May 5, the Progressive Promise Super PAC reported a $100,000 expenditure for TV and digital ads opposing Powell. It was the first instance of a PAC spending to oppose Powell – though the amount spent by PACs to support Cavanaugh and oppose Powell still pales in comparison to the amount spent to support Powell and oppose Cavanaugh.
Republican groups run anti-Cavanaugh ads
Cavanaugh has also faced outside spending from Republican groups – a tactic his campaign said is a “clear sign that Republicans view Cavanaugh as the most formidable general election candidate.”
The center-right 501(c)(4) American Action Network spent about $100,000 on ads linking Cavanaugh to Trump. Google’s ad transparency center shows the four video ads were viewed more than 3 million times when they ran in late March and early April.
The organization describes itself as advocating for “center-right policies” focused on the ideals of “freedom, limited government, American exceptionalism, and strong national security.” It’s connected to the American Action Forum, a 501(c)(3) center-right think tank.
And on May 7, a mysterious new Super PAC formed in April called Lead Left PAC spent $200,000 on ads calling Cavanaugh “MAGA” and alleging he “betrayed Nebraska Democrats.” The PAC made similar ad buys to boost or oppose Democratic candidates in other contentious primaries.
Lead Left’s website says it “stands against MAGA extremists who will infect our country with Donald Trump’s agenda.” But there’s little discernible information about who is behind the PAC. The PAC’s address is a Staples store in Tallahassee, Florida; the listed treasurer has no online presence. Metadata on the PAC’s website links to Standing Tall Action, an “America first” 501(c)(4) nonprofit.
“That’s probably the most fascinating element of the dark money, and more generally, independent spending that’s happening in this race,” Liu, the UNO professor, said. “This kind of Republican spending to affect the Democratic primary is intriguing. You go to ask which Democratic candidate these Republican interests are trying to support.”
After the Lead Left PAC ad buy, the Nebraska Democratic Party condemned Republican PAC spending in the primary – and other Nebraska races – as “Republican desperation.” Nebraska Democratic Party Chair Jane Kleeb said in a statement that the ads are a “nothing-burger smear campaign.”