Nebraska · individual fact

Nebraska health

Insurance coverage, personal healthcare spending, longevity, mortality, health risks, and provider shortages.

Uninsured rate · all ages7.1%2024 · #26 of 50 · highest first
Uninsured rate · under age 658.4%2024 · #27 of 50 · highest first
Private coverage · under age 6577.1%2024 · #7 of 50 · highest first

Nebraska over time

Explore Nebraska readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Nebraska officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Nebraska effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Nebraska change.

Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear

Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.

Uninsured rate · all ages Nebraska · source units
NebraskaPublished U.S. benchmark

Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.

Uninsured rate · all ages2024: 7.1%5.1%7.9%10.7%Nebraska, 2014: 9.7%Nebraska, 2015: 8.2%Nebraska, 2016: 8.6%Nebraska, 2017: 8.3%Nebraska, 2018: 8.3%Nebraska, 2019: 8.3%Nebraska, 2021: 7.1%Nebraska, 2022: 6.7%Nebraska, 2023: 6.1%Nebraska, 2024: 7.1%201420192024
✦ Major events & context · 37National context · Affordable Care Act signed · 2010-03-23ACA signedNational context · Supreme Court makes ACA Medicaid expansion optional for states · 2012-06-28Medicaid expansion rulingNational context · ACA Marketplace coverage and main Medicaid expansion begin · 2014-01-01ACA coverage beginsNational context · Opioid crisis declared a national public-health emergency · 2017-10-26Opioid emergencyNational context · COVID-19 characterized as a pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Pandemic Medicaid continuous-enrollment condition enacted · 2020-03-18Medicaid coverage protectionNational context · FDA authorizes the first COVID-19 vaccine for emergency use · 2020-12-11First COVID vaccine EUANational context · American Rescue Plan expands Marketplace premium assistance · 2021-03-11Marketplace aid expandedNational context · No Surprises Act billing protections begin · 2022-01-01Surprise-billing protectionsNational context · Supreme Court overturns Roe and Casey in Dobbs · 2022-06-24Dobbs abortion rulingNational context · 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline launches nationwide · 2022-07-16988 crisis line launchesNational context · Inflation Reduction Act signed · 2022-08-16Prescription-drug lawNational context · Medicare Part D insulin cost-sharing cap takes effect · 2023-01-01Part D insulin $35 capNational context · Medicaid coverage terminations can resume · 2023-04-01Medicaid terminations resumeNational context · Federal COVID-19 public-health emergency ends · 2023-05-11COVID health emergency endsNebraska · Nebraska tornadoes damage homes, farms and power lines, with two surveyed injuries · 2023-05-12Nebraska May 2023 tornadoesNebraska · Back-to-back Nebraska winter storms close roads and bring extreme cold · 2024-01-07Nebraska January 2024 stormsNebraska · Nebraska issues Executive Order 24-01: Emergency fuel-hauling driving-time relief during extreme cold · 2024-01-12Nebraska Order 24-01Nebraska · Nebraska issues Executive Order 24-02: Emergency electricity-production measures during extreme cold · 2024-01-17Nebraska Order 24-02Nebraska · Nebraska tornado outbreak damages homes, power lines and a manufacturing facility · 2024-04-26Nebraska April 2024 tornadoesNebraska · Nebraska storms flood homes and roads and damage farms and power lines · 2024-05-20Nebraska May 2024 floodingNational context · Medicare Part D out-of-pocket cap begins · 2025-01-01Part D $2,000 cap (2025)Nebraska · Dodge County tornado damages mobile homes and campers, with one reported injury · 2025-05-19Nebraska May 2025 tornadoesNational context · 2025 reconciliation law changes Medicaid and funds rural care · 2025-07-04Medicaid and rural-care lawNebraska · Nebraska storms damage homes and power infrastructure, with reported casualties · 2025-08-09Nebraska August 2025 stormsNational context · Rural Health Transformation awards announced for all 50 states · 2025-12-29Rural health awardsNational context · Temporary enhanced Marketplace premium tax credits end · 2026-01-01Enhanced ACA credits endNational context · First negotiated Medicare drug prices take effect · 2026-01-01Negotiated drug prices beginNebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-01: Power-demand emergency measures · 2026-01-23NE Order 26-01Nebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-02: Synthetic THC rulemaking and agency reviews · 2026-01-26NE Order 26-02Nebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-06: Statewide burn-permit suspension · 2026-03-13NE Order 26-06Nebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-08: Later burn-permit suspension, subsequently rescinded · 2026-03-25NE Order 26-08Nebraska · Nebraska rescinds Order 26-08’s burn-permit suspension · 2026-04-02NE Order 26-10Nebraska · Eastern Nebraska storms damage homes and farms, with reported outages and flooding · 2026-05-15Nebraska May stormsNational context · CMS issues Medicaid community-engagement implementation rule · 2026-06-01Medicaid eligibility ruleNebraska · Eastern Nebraska storms bring reported home damage, an injury and power-line damage · 2026-06-11Nebraska June stormsNebraska · Flooding strands vehicles and prompts rescues in Omaha and Lincoln · 2026-09-30Nebraska Sept 2026 flooding● Nebraska Legislature · 74● U.S. Congress · Nebraska delegation · 1◆ Governor · 11■ Nebraska agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2010-03-012026-09-30

19 of 19 reviewed Nebraska actions match · 16 date markers shown. 37 major events shown separately.

Nebraska · 2024: 7.1% · Rank #26 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2%

FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population. ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.

View observations and export data
Nebraska Uninsured rate · all ages · source units
PeriodNebraskaRankU.S. benchmark
20247.1%#26 of 508.2%
20236.1%#32 of 50Not available
20226.7%#26 of 50Not available
20217.1%#27 of 50Not available
2020Not availableUnavailableNot available
20198.3%#23 of 50Not available
20188.3%#21 of 50Not available
20178.3%#23 of 50Not available
20168.6%#22 of 50Not available
20158.2%#28 of 50Not available
20149.7%#29 of 50Not available
How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

Nebraska · state comparison

Who has health coverage?

Compare ACS annual estimates for all ages or people under 65. Coverage categories can overlap and do not sum to the insured share.

Nebraska · 20247.1%
Nebraska rank#26among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark8.2%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Uninsured rate · all ages

FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population.

ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Nebraska
Uninsured rate · all ages history in Nebraska5.6%7.9%10.2%20142024
2024 · Nebraska: 7.1% · Rank #26 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Nebraska Uninsured rate · all ages history
PeriodNebraskaCompare
20149.7%
20158.2%
20168.6%
20178.3%
20188.3%
20198.3%
2020Not available
20217.1%
20226.7%
20236.1%
20247.1%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Nebraska stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Nebraska has a dark outline.

Lower value · 2.8%Higher value · 16.7%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Nebraska · 7.1%2024 · Rank #26 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Nebraska with every state · 50 ranked
Uninsured rate · all ages · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Texas16.7%—
#2Georgia12%—
#3Oklahoma11.5%—
#4Nevada11.4%—
#5Alaska11%—
#6Florida10.9%—
#7Arizona10.3%—
#7Wyoming10.3%—
#9New Mexico10.1%—
#10Mississippi9.7%—
#10Tennessee9.7%—
#12Arkansas9.4%—
#13Idaho9.2%—
#14South Carolina9%—
#15Montana8.8%—
#16North Carolina8.6%—
#17Kansas8.5%—
#18Utah8.3%—
#19Alabama8.2%—
#20South Dakota8.1%—
#21Colorado7.9%—
#22Louisiana7.7%—
#22Missouri7.7%—
#22New Jersey7.7%—
#25Indiana7.5%—
#26Nebraska · your comparison7.1%—
#27Delaware6.9%—
#27Illinois6.9%—
#27Virginia6.9%—
#30Kentucky6.8%—
#31Ohio6.7%—
#32Washington6.5%—
#33Maryland6.3%—
#34North Dakota6.1%—
#35California5.9%—
#36Connecticut5.8%—
#36Pennsylvania5.8%—
#36West Virginia5.8%—
#39Maine5.5%—
#40Iowa5.4%—
#41Wisconsin5.3%—
#42Oregon5.2%—
#43Michigan5.1%—
#43Minnesota5.1%—
#45New York5%—
#46Rhode Island4.6%—
#47New Hampshire4.5%—
#48Vermont4.2%—
#49Hawaii3.5%—
#50Massachusetts2.8%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

People under 65 without health insurance

8.4%2024 ACS annual estimate

Share of Nebraska’s civilian noninstitutionalized residents under age 65 who lacked comprehensive health-insurance coverage at the time of the ACS survey.

This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.

Method and limitations

U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts estimate derived from the American Community Survey.

  • This excludes people age 65 and older and is a annual survey estimate rather than a current enrollment count.
  • Insurance status does not measure affordability, provider availability, coverage adequacy, or quality of care.
Nebraska · state comparison

Where do healthcare dollars go?

State spending is reported for 2020, the latest year available in this CMS state series. Choose a service to compare Nebraska with every state.

Nebraska · 2020$10,514
Nebraska rank#20among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$10,191Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Personal healthcare spending per resident

Personal health care expenditure per resident, assigned to the state where the patient resides.

2020 is the last year in this CMS state series. Personal health care excludes administration, public health, and investment included in national health expenditures. This is spending by all payers, not a household bill.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Nebraska
Personal healthcare spending per resident history in Nebraska$7.55K$9.23K$10.9K20142020
2020 · Nebraska: $10,514 · Rank #20 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $10,191 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Nebraska Personal healthcare spending per resident history
PeriodNebraskaCompare
2014$8,175
2015$8,579
2016$8,943
2017$9,189
2018$9,492
2019$9,917
2020$10,514

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Nebraska stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Nebraska has a dark outline.

Lower value · $7.52KHigher value · $14.01KStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Nebraska · $10,5142020 · Rank #20 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Nebraska with every state · 50 ranked
Personal healthcare spending per resident · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1New York$14,007—
#2Alaska$13,642—
#3Massachusetts$13,319—
#4Delaware$12,899—
#5West Virginia$12,769—
#6Vermont$12,756—
#7South Dakota$12,495—
#8Connecticut$12,489—
#9Maine$12,077—
#10New Jersey$11,868—
#11New Hampshire$11,793—
#12Rhode Island$11,694—
#13Pennsylvania$11,603—
#14North Dakota$11,301—
#15Wyoming$10,989—
#16Minnesota$10,846—
#17Maryland$10,839—
#18Indiana$10,517—
#19Louisiana$10,515—
#20Nebraska · your comparison$10,514—
#21Ohio$10,478—
#22California$10,299—
#23Hawaii$10,291—
#24Kentucky$10,257—
#25Montana$10,212—
#26Illinois$10,190—
#27Oregon$10,071—
#28Wisconsin$9,982—
#29Missouri$9,921—
#30Michigan$9,897—
#31Florida$9,865—
#32Iowa$9,789—
#33Oklahoma$9,444—
#34Kansas$9,408—
#35Mississippi$9,394—
#36Arkansas$9,338—
#37Tennessee$9,336—
#38Alabama$9,280—
#39Washington$9,265—
#40Virginia$9,195—
#41North Carolina$8,917—
#42New Mexico$8,902—
#43South Carolina$8,766—
#44Georgia$8,758—
#45Arizona$8,756—
#46Colorado$8,583—
#47Texas$8,406—
#48Nevada$8,348—
#49Idaho$8,148—
#50Utah$7,522—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Nebraska · state comparison

Health outcomes

Use age-adjusted mortality to account for different age distributions; life expectancy summarizes period death rates.

Nebraska · 202278.3 years
Nebraska rank#14among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark77.5 yearsSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Life expectancy at birth

FactVote uses CDC National Center for Health Statistics annual complete life-table estimates for the total Nebraska population. Values are rounded to the published tenth of a year.

The latest published comparable state series ends in 2022, even though newer national life-expectancy estimates may be available. Period life expectancy summarizes current mortality rates; it is not a forecast of how long a particular person will live. The 2020 and 2021 estimates reflect the mortality shock during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Nebraska
Life expectancy at birth history in Nebraska77.2 years78.4 years79.5 years20182022
2022 · Nebraska: 78.3 years · Rank #14 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 77.5 years · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Nebraska Life expectancy at birth history
PeriodNebraskaCompare
201879.1 years
201979.2 years
202077.7 years
202177.8 years
202278.3 years

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Nebraska stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Nebraska has a dark outline.

Lower value · 72.2 yearsHigher value · 80 yearsStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Nebraska · 78.3 years2022 · Rank #14 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Nebraska with every state · 50 ranked
Life expectancy at birth · 2022 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Hawaii80 years—
#2Massachusetts79.8 years—
#3New Jersey79.6 years—
#4New York79.5 years—
#5Connecticut79.4 years—
#6California79.3 years—
#6Minnesota79.3 years—
#8Rhode Island79.2 years—
#9Utah79 years—
#10New Hampshire78.7 years—
#11Colorado78.5 years—
#12Idaho78.4 years—
#12Washington78.4 years—
#14Nebraska · your comparison78.3 years—
#14Vermont78.3 years—
#16Wisconsin78.1 years—
#17Florida77.9 years—
#17Iowa77.9 years—
#17North Dakota77.9 years—
#20Maryland77.8 years—
#21Oregon77.7 years—
#22Illinois77.5 years—
#22Virginia77.5 years—
#24Montana77.3 years—
#24Pennsylvania77.3 years—
#24South Dakota77.3 years—
#27Texas77.1 years—
#28Michigan76.8 years—
#28Wyoming76.8 years—
#30Arizona76.7 years—
#31Maine76.6 years—
#32Delaware76.5 years—
#32Kansas76.5 years—
#34Nevada76.4 years—
#35Georgia75.9 years—
#35North Carolina75.9 years—
#37Alaska75.8 years—
#38Ohio75.6 years—
#39Indiana75.4 years—
#40Missouri75.2 years—
#41South Carolina75.1 years—
#42New Mexico74.5 years—
#43Arkansas73.9 years—
#44Alabama73.8 years—
#44Louisiana73.8 years—
#44Oklahoma73.8 years—
#44Tennessee73.8 years—
#48Kentucky73.6 years—
#49Mississippi72.6 years—
#50West Virginia72.2 years—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Nebraska · state comparison

Chronic illness and health risks

Compare age-adjusted adult prevalence using the same survey year and definition.

Nebraska · 20239.7%
Nebraska rank#29among 48 states with data
U.S. benchmark10.7%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted

Adult self-reported prevalence, age-adjusted to a common population.

Published CDC 2019–2023 series. Missing or suppressed estimates remain unranked. Confidence intervals describe sampling uncertainty; point ranks are not significance tests.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Nebraska
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history in Nebraska8.4%9.8%11.1%20192023
2023 · Nebraska: 9.7% · Rank #29 of 48, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 10.7% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Nebraska Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history
PeriodNebraskaCompare
20199.2%
20209%
20218.7%
20229.8%
20239.7%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Nebraska stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Nebraska has a dark outline.

Lower value · 7.8%Higher value · 15.1%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Nebraska · 9.7%2023 · Rank #29 of 48, highest first95% confidence interval: 9% – 10.3%Selected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Nebraska with every state · 48 ranked, 2 unavailable
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted · 2023 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Mississippi15.1%95% CI: 13.7–16.6
#1West Virginia15.1%95% CI: 13.9–16.3
#3Louisiana14.6%95% CI: 13.4–15.8
#4Alabama14%95% CI: 12.7–15.3
#5Arkansas13.1%95% CI: 12–14.3
#6South Carolina12.7%95% CI: 11.9–13.6
#6Tennessee12.7%95% CI: 11.7–13.8
#8Texas12.1%95% CI: 11–13.3
#9Indiana11.7%95% CI: 11.1–12.4
#10Georgia11.5%95% CI: 10.7–12.3
#10Ohio11.5%95% CI: 10.8–12.2
#12Oklahoma11.3%95% CI: 10.5–12.1
#13Delaware11.1%95% CI: 9.8–12.6
#14North Carolina11%95% CI: 9.8–12.3
#15Illinois10.9%95% CI: 9.9–12.1
#15Maryland10.9%95% CI: 10.2–11.7
#15Michigan10.9%95% CI: 10.1–11.8
#18Nevada10.8%95% CI: 8.9–13
#18New Mexico10.8%95% CI: 9.3–12.6
#20Missouri10.7%95% CI: 9.9–11.7
#20South Dakota10.7%95% CI: 8.9–12.8
#22California10.6%95% CI: 9.8–11.4
#23Kansas10.5%95% CI: 9.7–11.3
#24Virginia10.4%95% CI: 9.5–11.4
#25Florida10.1%95% CI: 9.1–11.1
#26Rhode Island10%95% CI: 9.1–11
#27Arizona9.9%95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#27Iowa9.9%95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#29Nebraska · your comparison9.7%95% CI: 9–10.3
#30Wisconsin9.6%95% CI: 9–10.2
#31Hawaii9.5%95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#31New York9.5%95% CI: 8.9–10.1
#31Oregon9.5%95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#34Wyoming9.4%95% CI: 8.5–10.5
#35Minnesota9.3%95% CI: 8.6–10
#36New Jersey9.1%95% CI: 8.4–9.9
#37Maine9%95% CI: 8.4–9.7
#38North Dakota8.9%95% CI: 8.1–9.7
#39Idaho8.7%95% CI: 7.9–9.6
#40Washington8.6%95% CI: 8.2–9
#41Massachusetts8.5%95% CI: 7.8–9.4
#42Connecticut8.4%95% CI: 7.6–9.3
#43Alaska8.2%95% CI: 7.4–9.2
#44Utah8.1%95% CI: 7.5–8.7
#45Colorado8%95% CI: 7.3–8.7
#46Montana7.9%95% CI: 7.2–8.7
#46New Hampshire7.9%95% CI: 7.1–8.8
#48Vermont7.8%95% CI: 7–8.7
—KentuckyNot availableNo comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
—PennsylvaniaNot availableNo comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Nebraska · state comparison

Where are healthcare workers in short supply?

Compare coverage of need, practitioners needed, or affected population for each discipline.

Nebraska · June 30, 202649.1%
Nebraska rank#24among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark47.4%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Primary care · need met

HRSA-designated shortage areas; measures describe need within those areas, not the entire state population.

National report totals can include territories. Designation rules and populations differ by discipline; do not add disciplines. Absolute population and practitioner ranks also reflect state size.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Nebraska stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Nebraska has a dark outline.

Lower value · 11.2%Higher value · 83.2%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Nebraska · 49.1%June 30, 2026 · Rank #24 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Nebraska with every state · 50 ranked
Primary care · need met · June 30, 2026 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1New Jersey83.2%—
#2Vermont82.6%—
#3South Carolina79.4%—
#4New Hampshire74.8%—
#5Rhode Island74.3%—
#6Louisiana72.1%—
#7Hawaii67.1%—
#8Utah65.4%—
#9Wisconsin65.2%—
#10Alabama63%—
#11Connecticut60.3%—
#12Massachusetts58%—
#13Tennessee58%—
#14Virginia57.2%—
#15Pennsylvania56.7%—
#16Maine56%—
#17Minnesota55.4%—
#18Wyoming54.4%—
#19Indiana54.2%—
#20California53.2%—
#21Arkansas52.6%—
#22Texas49.8%—
#23Ohio49.7%—
#24Nebraska · your comparison49.1%—
#25Alaska48.9%—
#26North Carolina48.1%—
#27Colorado47.5%—
#28Michigan44.9%—
#29Oregon43.9%—
#30Idaho43.9%—
#31Washington42.4%—
#32Illinois41.5%—
#33Nevada41.5%—
#34Arizona41.2%—
#35Kansas41.1%—
#36Iowa40.5%—
#37Florida39.7%—
#38Georgia39.1%—
#39Montana38.5%—
#40West Virginia38.3%—
#41North Dakota36.5%—
#42New York35.3%—
#43South Dakota34.6%—
#44Mississippi34.1%—
#45Maryland31.6%—
#46New Mexico31.4%—
#47Kentucky30.8%—
#48Oklahoma28.6%—
#49Missouri23.7%—
#50Delaware11.2%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Nebraska · state comparison

Employer coverage costs

Premium comparisons use a published historical all-state employer survey. Total premiums combine employer and employee payments.

Nebraska · 2020$7,611
Nebraska rank#6among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$7,149Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Single coverage premium · all firms

Average total annual employer-plan premium per enrolled employee at private-sector establishments offering coverage.

Historical 2020 published all-state table; not a current quote. Includes both employer and employee contributions, rather than just a worker’s payment. Survey estimates and small firm samples carry uncertainty. Missing estimates remain unavailable.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Nebraska stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Nebraska has a dark outline.

Lower value · $6.39KHigher value · $8.64KStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Nebraska · $7,6112020 · Rank #6 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Nebraska with every state · 50 ranked
Single coverage premium · all firms · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Alaska$8,635—
#2New York$8,177—
#3New Hampshire$7,991—
#4Vermont$7,868—
#5Wyoming$7,743—
#6Nebraska · your comparison$7,611—
#7South Carolina$7,516—
#8Connecticut$7,501—
#9Maine$7,496—
#10Massachusetts$7,452—
#11Washington$7,440—
#12New Mexico$7,424—
#13Illinois$7,376—
#14New Jersey$7,373—
#15Maryland$7,352—
#16Rhode Island$7,326—
#17Indiana$7,319—
#18Delaware$7,280—
#19Wisconsin$7,250—
#20Pennsylvania$7,246—
#21North Dakota$7,216—
#22Colorado$7,206—
#23Missouri$7,179—
#24California$7,173—
#25Florida$7,078—
#26South Dakota$7,070—
#27Oklahoma$7,058—
#28Hawaii$7,040—
#29North Carolina$7,036—
#30Texas$7,017—
#31West Virginia$6,993—
#32Ohio$6,989—
#33Kentucky$6,949—
#34Iowa$6,932—
#35Virginia$6,928—
#36Oregon$6,917—
#37Minnesota$6,910—
#38Georgia$6,876—
#39Montana$6,860—
#40Idaho$6,744—
#41Louisiana$6,713—
#42Michigan$6,683—
#43Kansas$6,675—
#44Arizona$6,612—
#45Utah$6,593—
#46Mississippi$6,561—
#47Nevada$6,493—
#48Tennessee$6,485—
#49Arkansas$6,414—
#50Alabama$6,393—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Nebraska · state comparison

Mental health and treatment

Adult statewide estimates use the same SAMHSA model and survey period. Treatment use is a share of all adults, not a share of adults with mental illness.

Nebraska · 2023–202424.1%
Nebraska rank#24among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark23.1%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Any Mental Illness · adults 18+

Civilian noninstitutionalized adults age 18+, past-year prevalence or treatment use, estimated by small-area survey models.

Mental illness and depression estimates pool 2023–2024; treatment use covers 2024 only. Definitions and model-based uncertainty differ from the national page’s annual 2025 survey estimates. Point-estimate ranks do not establish significant differences. Serious mental illness is a subset of any mental illness, so their percentages must not be added.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Nebraska stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Nebraska has a dark outline.

Lower value · 18.1%Higher value · 31.6%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Nebraska · 24.1%2023–2024 · Rank #24 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Nebraska with every state · 50 ranked
Any Mental Illness · adults 18+ · 2023–2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Oregon31.6%—
#2Vermont29.1%—
#3West Virginia28.1%—
#4Washington27.9%—
#5New Hampshire27.7%—
#6Tennessee27%—
#7Utah26.7%—
#8Maine26.7%—
#9Arkansas26.6%—
#10Colorado26.4%—
#11Rhode Island25.8%—
#12Missouri25.7%—
#13Montana25.6%—
#14Indiana25.3%—
#15Kentucky25.3%—
#16Georgia25.2%—
#17Iowa25%—
#18Massachusetts24.9%—
#19Wyoming24.7%—
#20Nevada24.6%—
#21Arizona24.6%—
#22Wisconsin24.6%—
#23Idaho24.5%—
#24Nebraska · your comparison24.1%—
#25Louisiana24.1%—
#26Alaska24%—
#27Pennsylvania23.9%—
#28New Mexico23.9%—
#28Ohio23.9%—
#30Connecticut23.7%—
#31Kansas23.7%—
#32Michigan23.6%—
#33Virginia23.1%—
#34Alabama23%—
#35North Dakota23%—
#36Maryland22.7%—
#37Oklahoma22.6%—
#38Minnesota22.6%—
#39Illinois22.2%—
#40Delaware22.1%—
#41New York21.9%—
#42South Dakota21.8%—
#43California21.6%—
#44North Carolina21.4%—
#45Florida20.8%—
#46Texas20.7%—
#47Mississippi20.5%—
#48Hawaii19.8%—
#49South Carolina19.8%—
#50New Jersey18.1%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health from FactVote’s Nebraska candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.

84 statements from 14 candidates

2026 Nebraska Governor — General Election

3 candidates with matching statements · 4 statements

Ben Steffen

1 statement

Democratic · Lieutenant Governor · NE

Care & public health

Nebraskans work hard for a living and should be able to afford to take care of their families. The essentials like housing, childcare, healthcare, and groceries are too expensive. I will work with state and national leaders to address our affordability crisis.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: A Different Kind of Leader for Nebraska.

Candidate campaign source

Nebraskans work hard for a living and should be able to afford to take care of their families. The essentials like housing, childcare, healthcare, and groceries are too expensive. I will work with state and national leaders to address our affordability crisis.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Ben Steffen campaign source 1 ↗

Lynne Walz

1 statement

Democratic · Governor · NE

Care & public health

Nebraskans work hard for a living and should be able to afford to take care of their families. The essentials like housing, childcare, healthcare, and groceries are too expensive. I will work with state and national leaders to address our affordability crisis.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Housing affordability

Candidate campaign source

Nebraskans work hard for a living and should be able to afford to take care of their families. The essentials like housing, childcare, healthcare, and groceries are too expensive. I will work with state and national leaders to address our affordability crisis.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Lynne Walz — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

Rick Beard

2 statements

Legal Marijuana NOW · Governor · NE

Health coverage

We need an air horn and a VETO stamp to protect our votes from getting changed to policy we didn't vote for. They want to lower the minimum wage of our 14-16 year old child workforce from $15 an hour to $13.50......Wow......Can 14 year-olds vote for or negotiate their employee rights?? They killed i…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Government ethics, accountability, and elections

Candidate campaign source

We need an air horn and a VETO stamp to protect our votes from getting changed to policy we didn't vote for. They want to lower the minimum wage of our 14-16 year old child workforce from $15 an hour to $13.50......Wow......Can 14 year-olds vote for or negotiate their employee rights?? They killed initiative 436, our voter approved sick leave increases for young workers, seasonal, and temporary workers, while removing their rights to sue for employer violations. It's unbelievable. They block our medical cannabis, dilute our voter approved minimum wage increases, and drastically delay our Medicaid expansion.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Rick Beard — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
View 1 more statement from Rick Beard
Health coverage

The will of the voters.... Our current governor and legislature repetitively deny the vote of the same people that put them in office. As a third party governor, I feel the unicameral will accomplish more and actually function as intended by encouraging the republicans and democrats to work together…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Government ethics, accountability, and elections

Candidate campaign source

The will of the voters.... Our current governor and legislature repetitively deny the vote of the same people that put them in office. As a third party governor, I feel the unicameral will accomplish more and actually function as intended by encouraging the republicans and democrats to work together instead of against each other. It’s simple. I will uphold the will of the vote, even if I don’t agree with it. I am not red or blue and am the only candidate that's never taken a dollar from any political party or private interest group. I will listen to you, not a bag of money. I'm excited about the $105,000 governor's salary with health insurance when other candidates are deeply connected to million$ in special interest party funding.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Rick Beard — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗

2026 Nebraska Secretary of State — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Democratic · Secretary of State · NE

Care & public health

Boosting Revenue and Trust: Efficient workflows lead to higher compliance rates, helping local communities reinvest in themselves. Reliable licensing also protects consumers, building public confidence in everyday industries from agriculture to healthcare.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Agriculture and rural communities

Candidate campaign source

Boosting Revenue and Trust: Efficient workflows lead to higher compliance rates, helping local communities reinvest in themselves. Reliable licensing also protects consumers, building public confidence in everyday industries from agriculture to healthcare.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Sarah J. Slattery — candidate-owned primary source 5 ↗

2026 Nebraska U.S. House — District 1 — General Election

2 candidates with matching statements · 5 statements

Nik Sandman

4 statements

Libertarian · U.S. House District 1 · NE

Health coverage

I support Medicare For All—comprehensive coverage that follows you from job to job, farm to town, covering prescriptions, dental, vision, and mental health. No premiums. No deductibles. No bankruptcies.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Social Security, Medicare, and retirement

Candidate campaign source

I support Medicare For All—comprehensive coverage that follows you from job to job, farm to town, covering prescriptions, dental, vision, and mental health. No premiums. No deductibles. No bankruptcies.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Nik Sandman — candidate-owned primary source ↗
View 3 more statements from Nik Sandman
Health coverage

Medicare for All

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Fighting for Nebraska

Candidate campaign source

Medicare for All

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Nik Sandman — candidate-owned primary source ↗
Care & public health

Government should protect your freedom, not control your choices. From farming practices to healthcare decisions, you know best.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Civil rights and individual liberty

Candidate campaign source

Government should protect your freedom, not control your choices. From farming practices to healthcare decisions, you know best.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Nik Sandman — candidate-owned primary source ↗
Care & public health

Fifth-generation farmer. Traditional values. Constitutional rights. Fair treatment for agriculture. Healthcare for all Nebraskans.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Not Career Politicians

Candidate campaign source

Fifth-generation farmer. Traditional values. Constitutional rights. Fair treatment for agriculture. Healthcare for all Nebraskans.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Nik Sandman — candidate-owned primary source ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 2
How statements are selected

This section matches specific health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health terms in retained, attributed source text from published Nebraska candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.

Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.

Nebraska incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Nebraska legislators and Nebraska’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Nebraska’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

8 matching sponsorships or proposals · 8 Nebraska incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Eliot Bostar

Nebraska Senate, District 29 · –NE

1 proposal
View proposals from Eliot Bostar
Nebraska Legislature · LB 812

Provide requirements for the Department of Health and Human Services relating to medicaid eligibility redeterminations and community engagement

Apr 17, 2026 · Indefinitely postponed

Eliot Bostar · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

LB 812 proposed limiting Medicaid eligibility redeterminations to the frequency required by the cited federal law. Its reviewed provision would delay community-engagement requirements until the later of the date required by the cited federal law or CMS, require no more than one month of compliance or exemption for applicants and for enrollees since their most recent application or renewal, and verify compliance or exemption only at redetermination and no more often than every six months. It was indefinitely postponed; these proposed state limits were not enacted by this bill.

Indefinitely postponed on 2026-04-17. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.

Why this record is included

The fact measures people under age 65 without health insurance. Eligibility for coverage directly concerns this population; payment for a particular service for people already insured does not itself establish expanded insurance enrollment. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Nebraska evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

(5)(a) The department shall redetermine eligibility for the medical assistance program no more frequently than required by 42 U.S.C. 1396a(e) (14)(L), as such section existed on January 1, 2026. (b) The department shall implement community engagement requirements for the medical assistance program only as required by 42 U.S.C. 1396a(xx), as such section existed on January 1, 2026, and the department shall: (i) Implement community engagement requirements no earlier than the date required by 42 U.S.C. 1396a(xx), as such section existed on January 1, 2026, or by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, whichever is later; (ii) Require no more than one month of compliance with, or exemption from, the community engagement requirements for (A) applicants for medical assistance; and (B) enrollees since the most recent application or renewal; and (iii) Verify community engagement requirement compliance or exemption status only at redetermination of eligibility and not more frequently than once every six months.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Jane Raybould

Nebraska Senate, District 28 · –NE

1 proposal
View proposals from Jane Raybould
Nebraska Legislature · LB 1088

Require persons convicted of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence or subject to domestic abuse protection orders to surrender firearms for a period of time

Apr 17, 2026 · Indefinitely postponed

Jane Raybould · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed section 1 of LB 1088 proposed court orders requiring surrender of firearms and ammunition following specified domestic-abuse protection orders or misdemeanor convictions. It sets a general deadline of 48 hours after receipt of the order and, for an incarcerated domestic-violence misdemeanant, 48 hours after release unless an earlier period is agreed in writing by the respondent and court, storage and return procedures, and misdemeanor penalties for noncompliance. Protection-order restrictions track the order’s duration; the specified domestic-violence conviction restriction lasts seven years after conviction. The bill was indefinitely postponed.

Indefinitely postponed on 2026-04-17. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.

Why this record is included

The mortality series includes firearm deaths across intents, including suicide and homicide. Storage rules and firearm regulation concern possible components of injury prevention without proving an effect on deaths. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Nebraska evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Section 1. (1) For purposes of this section: (a) Firearm has the same meaning as in section 28-1201; (b) Misdemeanor crime of domestic violence has the same meaning as in section 28-1206; (c) Qualified third party means: (i) A county sheriff, police officer, or member of the Nebraska State Patrol; (ii) A firearm dealer licensed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 923; or (iii) Any other responsible adult named by a court in an order under this section; and (d) Respondent means the person subject to an order under this section. (2) A court shall enter an order requiring a person to surrender all firearms and ammunition in his or her possession when: (a) Issuing a domestic abuse protection order as provided in section 26-115; (b) Sentencing a defendant to a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence as provided in section 10 of this act; (c) Sentencing a defendant for a misdemeanor violation of a domestic abuse protection order or foreign domestic abuse protection order as provided in section 26-118; or (d) Issuing an order relating to a foreign domestic abuse protection order as provided in section 9 of this act. (3) An order under this section shall: (a) Require the respondent, within the deadline required by subsection (4) of this section, to: (i) Surrender all firearms or ammunition in the respondent's possession in this state to a qualified third party; and (ii) Complete the affidavit under subsection (6) of this section and deliver it to the sheriff, county attorney, the designee of the sheriff or county attorney, or any person named by the court in the order; (b) Order the respondent not to possess any firearms or ammunition for the period of time provided in subsection (5) of this section; (c) Notify the respondent that the respondent may be responsible for paying any costs of storing such firearms or ammunition; (d) Notify the respondent that following the expiration of the period of time provided for in subsection (5) of this section, the respondent may reclaim possession of such firearms or ammunition, unless otherwise prohibited by law from possessing such firearms or ammunition at that time; and (e) Notify the respondent of the penalty for violating this section or section 28-1206. (4)(a) Except as provided in subdivision (4)(b) of this section, the respondent shall surrender all firearms and ammunition in the respondent's possession in this state to a qualified third party and complete and return the affidavit under subsection (6) of this section within forty-eight hours after receipt of the order under subsection (3) of this section. (b) For a respondent who is convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence and sentenced to a period of incarceration, the deadline in this subsection shall be forty-eight hours after release from incarceration, unless an earlier period is agreed to in writing by the respondent and the court, in which case a responsible person designated by the incarcerated respondent may surrender the respondent's firearms and ammunition and complete the affidavit on the respondent's behalf. (5) An order issued under this section shall remain in effect: (a) For an order arising from any protection order, so long as such protection order is in effect, including any renewals; and (b) For an order arising from a conviction for a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, for a period of seven years following such conviction. (6) The State Court Administrator shall develop a standard affidavit form for use under this section. The administrator shall develop such form in consultation with advocacy groups dedicated to ending sexual and domestic violence. The administrator shall make the form available on a judicial branch website accessible to the public. (7) Prior to release from incarceration for a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, a county jail or prison shall provide a respondent with written notice of his or her obligations under this section. (8) Upon issuance of an order under this section, the court shall transmit a copy of such order to the sheriff and any other local law enforcement agency in the county where the respondent resides and to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's National Instant Criminal Background Check System. (9) A law enforcement agency that takes possession of firearms or ammunition under this section shall: (a) Maintain such firearms and ammunition in a secure location; (b) Develop procedures for returning such firearms and ammunition to a respondent following expiration of the period described in subsection (5) of this section; and (c) Verify that a respondent may lawfully possess any such firearms or ammunition before returning them to the respondent. (10) A respondent who fails to comply with an order issued under this section shall be guilty of a Class I misdemeanor.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

John Cavanaugh

Nebraska Senate, District 9 · –NE

1 proposal
View proposals from John Cavanaugh
Nebraska Legislature · LB 957

Provide a cause of action against certain adults for allowing a minor to possess a handgun and create an offense of leaving a loaded firearm in a location accessible to a minor

Apr 17, 2026 · Indefinitely postponed

John Cavanaugh · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed section 5 of LB 957 proposed a Class I misdemeanor when a person leaves a loaded firearm without a trigger lock, locked container or another reasonably secure location; knows or has reason to believe a child under 14 is likely to gain access without parental or guardian permission; and the child actually gains access without that consent and publicly displays the firearm or uses it to cause bodily injury or death. The exceptions concern access resulting from unlawful entry by any person and legally justified possession or use. The bill was indefinitely postponed and did not enact this offense.

Indefinitely postponed on 2026-04-17. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.

Why this record is included

The mortality series includes firearm deaths across intents, including suicide and homicide. Storage rules and firearm regulation concern possible components of injury prevention without proving an effect on deaths. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Nebraska evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Sec. 5. (1) A person commits an offense if: (a) Such person stores or leaves a loaded firearm which is not (i) secured by a trigger lock mechanism, (ii) placed in a securely locked box or container, or (iii) placed in some other location which a reasonable person would believe to be secure from a minor under the age of fourteen years; (b) Such person knows or has reason to believe that a minor under the age of fourteen years is likely to gain access to the firearm without the permission of the minor's parent or guardian; (c) The minor gains access to the firearm without the consent of the minor's parent or guardian; and (d) The minor exhibits the firearm in a public place or uses the firearm to cause bodily injury or death to a person. (2) This section does not apply if: (a) The minor obtains the firearm as a result of an unlawful entry by any person; or (b) If the minor's possession or use of the firearm is justified under sections 28-1406 to 28-1416. (3) A violation of this subsection is a Class I misdemeanor.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Kathleen Kauth

Nebraska Senate, District 31 · –NE

1 proposal
View proposals from Kathleen Kauth
Nebraska Legislature · LB 574

Adopt the Let Them Grow Act and the Preborn Child Protection Act and provide for discipline under the Uniform Credentialing Act

May 22, 2023 · Enacted

Kathleen Kauth · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed Preborn Child Protection Act provisions of the final LB 574 prohibit physician-provided abortions at twelve or more weeks as dated from the last menstrual period, with medical-emergency, sexual-assault and incest exceptions. The definitions exclude ectopic-pregnancy removal and specified other care; the act does not impose civil or criminal liability on the woman receiving the abortion. Kathleen Kauth was the bill’s principal introducer; this attribution does not claim she authored every later amendment. The signing establishes enactment, not present enforceability or an effect on the 2025 abortion count. The emergency definition requires a threat of death or serious risk of substantial, irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function and excludes a claim or diagnosis based on the woman’s anticipated self-harming conduct. Physicians must document the applicable exception in the medical record.

Approved by Governor on 2023-05-22. Provisions/portions of LB626 amended into LB574 by AM1658. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.

Why this record is included

This fact counts abortions reported as performed in Nebraska in 2025, regardless of the patient’s residence. It is not a count of all abortions obtained by Nebraska residents in other states. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Nebraska evidence context: Abortions reported as performed in Nebraska. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Section 1. Sections 1 to 6 of this act shall be known and may be cited as the Preborn Child Protection Act. Sec. 2. The Preborn Child Protection Act only applies to intrauterine pregnancies. Sec. 3. For purposes of the Preborn Child Protection Act: (1)(a) Abortion means the prescription or use of any instrument, device, medicine, drug, or substance to or upon a woman known to be pregnant with the specific intent of terminating the life of her preborn child. (b) Abortion shall under no circumstances be interpreted to include: (i) Removal of an ectopic pregnancy; (ii) Removal of the remains of a preborn child who has already died; (iii) An act done with the intention to save the life or preserve the health of the preborn child; (iv) The accidental or unintentional termination of the life of a preborn child; or (v) During the practice of in vitro fertilization or another assisted reproductive technology, the termination or loss of the life of a preborn child who is not being carried inside a woman's body; (2) Gestational age means the age of a preborn child as calculated from the first day of the last menstrual period of the pregnant woman; (3)(a) Medical emergency means any condition which, in reasonable medical judgment, so complicates the medical condition of the pregnant woman as to necessitate the termination of her pregnancy to avert her death or for which a delay in terminating her pregnancy will create a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function. (b) No condition shall be deemed a medical emergency if based on a claim or diagnosis that the woman will engage in conduct which would result in her death or in substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function; (4) Preborn child means an individual living member of the species homo sapiens, throughout the embryonic and fetal stages of development to full gestation and childbirth; (5) Pregnant means the condition of having a living preborn child inside one's body; and (6) Reasonable medical judgment means a medical judgment that could be made by a reasonably prudent physician, knowledgeable about the case and the treatment possibilities with respect to the medical conditions involved. Sec. 4. (1) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, a physician, before performing or inducing an abortion, shall first: (a) Determine, using standard medical practice, the gestational age of the preborn child; and (b) Record in the pregnant woman's medical record: (i) The method used to determine the gestational age of the preborn child; and (ii) The date, time, and results of such determination. (2) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, it shall be unlawful for any physician to perform or induce an abortion: (a) Before fulfilling the requirements of subsection (1) of this section; or (b) If the probable gestational age of the preborn child has been determined to be twelve or more weeks. (3) It shall not be a violation of subsection (1) or (2) of this section for a physician to perform or induce an abortion in the case of: (a) Medical emergency; (b) Pregnancy resulting from sexual assault as defined in section 28-319 or 28-319.01; or (c) Pregnancy resulting from incest as defined in section 28-703. Sec. 5. (1) If a physician performs or induces an abortion because of a medical emergency pursuant to subdivision (3)(a) of section 4 of this act, the physician shall certify in writing that a medical emergency existed and explain the medical emergency in the written certification. The physician shall keep the written certification in the woman's medical record. (2) If a physician performs or induces an abortion in the case of sexual assault or incest pursuant to subdivision (3)(b) or (c) of section 4 of this act, the physician shall certify in writing that the abortion was performed because of sexual assault or incest and that the physician complied with all applicable duties imposed by section 28-902. The physician shall keep the written certification in the woman's medical record. Sec. 6. No woman upon whom an abortion is attempted, induced, or performed shall be liable for a violation of the Preborn Child Protection Act.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Megan Hunt

Nebraska Senate, District 8 · –NE

1 proposal
View proposals from Megan Hunt
Nebraska Legislature · LB 275

Require the Department of Health and Human Services to screen state wards for social security benefit eligibility

Jun 4, 2025 · Enacted

Megan Hunt · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed provision of LB 275 requires DHHS to screen each child entering its charge for Social Security eligibility within 60 days, apply when a child may qualify, and appeal a denial when necessary and in the child’s best interest. DHHS must give the child, guardian ad litem and parents written notices within ten calendar days of notification of each specified determination, approval or payee appointment, including the relevant payee and appeal information. This connection concerns OASDI child benefits; it does not count SSI as OASDI or establish completed applications or benefit awards.

Approved by Governor on 2025-06-04. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.

Why this record is included

The fact counts OASDI retirement, survivor and disability beneficiaries in current-payment status. Screening children for qualifying OASDI benefits concerns entry into that program; broader Social Security language is connected only for its OASDI component. SSI, Medicare, tax credits and Social Security number issuance are separate matters. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Nebraska evidence context: Nebraska residents receiving Social Security benefits. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

(3)(a) The department shall screen each child under its charge for social security benefit eligibility within sixty days after the date the child enters its charge. (b)(i) If the department determines that a child may be eligible for social security benefits, it shall submit an application for such benefits on behalf of the child and, if necessary and in the child's best interest, appeal a denied application. (ii) The department shall provide written notice to the child, using age- appropriate language, the child's guardian ad litem, and the child's parents, of all benefit eligibility determinations from the Social Security Administration, including benefit approval, denial, and appeal outcomes, within ten calendar days after the date the department is notified of such eligibility determination. (iii) If the child is approved to receive social security benefits, within ten calendar days after the date the department is notified of the approval, the department shall provide written notice to the child, using age-appropriate language, the child's guardian ad litem, and the child's parents, that adults known to the child may apply to be the child's representative payee for the purposes of receiving social security benefit payments. (iv) If the department is appointed to serve as the child's representative payee, within ten calendar days after the date the department is notified of such appointment, the department shall provide written notice to the child, using age-appropriate language, the child's guardian ad litem, and the child's parents, of such appointment, the child's and the child's parents' rights to appeal the appointment, and the deadline for such appeals.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Don Bacon

U.S. House of Representatives, Nebraska District 2 · R–NE

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Don Bacon
U.S. Congress · Nebraska delegation · HR 2243

LEOSA Reform Act

May 15, 2025 · In Congress

Rep. Don Bacon · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed section 2 of HR 2243 would add people authorized under LEOSA to carry a concealed firearm to the listed exceptions to the federal school-zone possession prohibition. Don Bacon is the verified primary sponsor. The House-passed bill remains a proposal at the review cutoff; it does not demonstrate that firearm deaths changed.

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.

Why this record is included

The mortality series includes firearm deaths across intents, including suicide and homicide. Storage rules and firearm regulation concern possible components of injury prevention without proving an effect on deaths. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Nebraska evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

2.Conforming the Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act and the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990Section 922(q)(2)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended—(1)by striking or at the end of clause (vi);(2)by striking the period at the end of clause (vii) and inserting ; or; and(3)by adding at the end the following:(viii)by an individual authorized by section 926B or 926C to carry a concealed firearm..
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Nebraska officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.

Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Nebraska statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 6, 2026.