Nebraska · individual fact

Nebraska real gross domestic product

Nebraska’s inflation-adjusted economic output, annual growth, industry structure, and employment context.

Real GDP$156.61B2025 · #34 of 50 · highest first
Annual real GDP growth1.3%2025 · #41 of 50 · highest first
Current-dollar GDP$206.62B2025 · #34 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.

Real GDP 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.

Real GDP2025: $156.61B$0$13.4T$26.8TNebraska, 2014: $115.65BNebraska, 2015: $119.64BNebraska, 2016: $121.3BNebraska, 2017: $123.22BNebraska, 2018: $125.47BNebraska, 2019: $127.48BNebraska, 2020: $127.15BNebraska, 2021: $136.14BNebraska, 2022: $140.03BNebraska, 2023: $151.64BNebraska, 2024: $154.59BNebraska, 2025: $156.61B201420192025
✦ Major events & context · 64National context · Hurricanes Katrina and Rita · 2005-08-29Katrina and RitaNational context · Great Financial Crisis and Great Recession · 2008-09-15Great Financial CrisisNational context · Federal Reserve moves rates close to zero · 2008-12-16Fed near-zero ratesNational context · American Recovery and Reinvestment Act · 2009-02-17Recovery ActNational context · Japan disaster disrupts U.S. auto production · 2011-05-17Japan / auto supplyNational context · Midwest drought reduces farm output · 2012-09-27Drought / farm outputNational context · Automatic federal spending cuts begin · 2013-03-01Federal spending cutsNational context · 2013 federal government shutdown · 2013-10-012013 shutdownNational context · Oil-price decline cuts drilling investment · 2015-02-24Oil investment downturnNational context · Hurricanes Harvey and Irma disrupt activity · 2017-08-25Harvey and IrmaNational context · 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act · 2017-12-222017 tax lawNational context · U.S.–China tariff escalation · 2018-07-06U.S.–China tariffsNational context · 2018–19 federal government shutdown · 2018-12-222018–19 shutdownNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2019 rate cuts · 2019-07-312019 Fed rate cutsNational context · COVID-19 pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Emergency rate cuts and asset purchases · 2020-03-15Fed emergency supportNational context · CARES Act pandemic relief · 2020-03-27CARES Act reliefNational context · American Rescue Plan · 2021-03-11American Rescue PlanNational context · Reopening recovery meets supply bottlenecks · 2021-07-09Reopening / shortagesNational context · Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act · 2021-11-15Infrastructure lawNational context · Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine · 2022-02-24Russia invades UkraineNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2022 rate increases · 2022-03-16Fed rate increasesNational context · Semiconductor and energy investment incentives · 2022-08-16CHIPS / energy incentivesNational context · Banking stress and credit conditions · 2023-03-22Banking / credit stressNebraska · Nebraska tornadoes damage homes, farms and power lines, with two surveyed injuries · 2023-05-12Nebraska May 2023 tornadoesNebraska · Nebraska windstorm and embedded tornadoes damage homes, crops and power infrastructure · 2023-07-12Nebraska July 2023 windstormNebraska · 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 damage homes, power lines and a road-supply building · 2024-05-06Nebraska May 6 stormsNebraska · Nebraska storms flood homes and roads and damage farms and power lines · 2024-05-20Nebraska May 2024 floodingNebraska · Derecho and tornadoes damage Nebraska homes, utilities and farm infrastructure · 2024-05-24Nebraska May 2024 derechoNebraska · Nebraska storms damage homes and agricultural structures · 2024-06-15Nebraska June 15 stormsNebraska · Damaging winds affect Nebraska homes, businesses and power infrastructure · 2024-07-31Nebraska July 2024 windstormNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2024 rate cuts · 2024-09-182024 Fed rate cutsNebraska · Nebraska blizzard damages power infrastructure and closes highways · 2025-03-19Nebraska March 2025 blizzardNational context · Broad U.S. tariffs and volatile trade flows · 2025-04-02Tariffs / trade timingNational context · 2025 tax and spending reconciliation law · 2025-07-042025 tax / spending lawNebraska · Nebraska storms damage homes and power infrastructure, with reported casualties · 2025-08-09Nebraska August 2025 stormsNational context · 2025 shutdown reduces federal services · 2025-10-012025 shutdownNebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-04: Temporary transportation-network dynamic-pricing waiver · 2026-02-05NE Order 26-04Nebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-05: Commercial-carrier relief for Oklahoma and Kansas wildfires · 2026-02-27NE Order 26-05National context · Iran conflict and Strait of Hormuz disruption · 2026-02-28Iran / Hormuz disruptionNebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-07: Commercial-carrier relief for Nebraska wildfires · 2026-03-16NE Order 26-07Nebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-09: Later Nebraska wildfire commercial-carrier relief · 2026-03-25NE Order 26-09Nebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-11: Nebraska disaster-relief carrier measures through 2026-04-14 · 2026-04-07NE Order 26-11Nebraska · Nebraska approves LB1010: large-load electricity, storage and data-center rules · 2026-04-14Nebraska LB1010 approvalNebraska · Nebraska approves LB1261: Conditional eminent-domain protection for large-load private generation · 2026-04-14Nebraska LB1261Nebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-12: Nebraska disaster-relief carrier measures through 2026-05-14 · 2026-04-20NE Order 26-12Nebraska · Eastern Nebraska storms damage homes and farms, with reported outages and flooding · 2026-05-15Nebraska May stormsNebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-13: Nebraska disaster-relief carrier measures through 2026-06-14 · 2026-05-15NE Order 26-13Nebraska · Eastern Nebraska storms bring reported home damage, an injury and power-line damage · 2026-06-11Nebraska June stormsNebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-15: Nebraska disaster-relief carrier measures through 2026-07-14 · 2026-06-16NE Order 26-15Nebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-16: Nebraska disaster-relief carrier measures through 2026-08-12 · 2026-07-14NE Order 26-16Nebraska · Nebraska’s LB1010 large-load, storage-tax and data-center provisions take effect · 2026-07-18Nebraska LB1010 effectiveNebraska · Nebraska’s current section 70-670 takes effect with conditional generation protection · 2026-07-18Nebraska generation provision effectiveNebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-17: Economic-development incentive review and data-center task force · 2026-07-20NE Order 26-17Nebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-18: Nebraska disaster-relief carrier measures through 2026-09-11 · 2026-08-12NE Order 26-18Nebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-19: Nebraska disaster-relief carrier measures through 2026-10-11 · 2026-09-15NE Order 26-19Nebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-20: Seasonal agricultural transport weight relief · 2026-09-24NE Order 26-20Nebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-21: Temporary diesel relief and agricultural motor-fuel refund claims · 2026-09-24NE Order 26-21Nebraska · Nebraska issues Order 26-22: Statewide economic-growth coordination working group · 2026-09-29NE Order 26-22Nebraska · Flooding strands vehicles and prompts rescues in Omaha and Lincoln · 2026-09-30Nebraska Sept 2026 flooding● Nebraska Legislature · 22● U.S. Congress · Nebraska delegation · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.◆ Governor · 1922■ Nebraska agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2005-08-012026-09-30

21 of 21 reviewed Nebraska actions match · 18 date markers shown. 64 major events shown separately.

Nebraska · 2025: $156.61B · Rank #34 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $23.94T

Total value added produced in the state in millions of chained 2017 dollars. Annual estimates; the downloaded BEA snapshot is retained with a source hash. Revisions can change historical values and ranks. 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 Real GDP · source units
PeriodNebraskaRankU.S. benchmark
2025$156.61B#34 of 50$23.94T
2024$154.59B#34 of 50$23.39T
2023$151.64B#34 of 50$22.72T
2022$140.03B#34 of 50$22.08T
2021$136.14B#35 of 50$21.56T
2020$127.15B#35 of 50$20.28T
2019$127.48B#34 of 50$20.72T
2018$125.47B#35 of 50$20.19T
2017$123.22B#35 of 50$19.61T
2016$121.3B#35 of 50$19.14T
2015$119.64B#35 of 50$18.8T
2014$115.65B#35 of 50$18.26T
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

Nebraska output and growth

Annual real GDP removes price changes. Annual growth compares annual levels; it is separate from an annualized quarterly growth rate.

Nebraska · 2025$156.61B
Nebraska rank#34among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$23.94TSame 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.

Real GDP

Total value added produced in the state in millions of chained 2017 dollars.

Annual estimates; the downloaded BEA snapshot is retained with a source hash. Revisions can change historical values and ranks.

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
Real GDP history in Nebraska$-3.46T$12.03T$27.52T20142025
2025 · Nebraska: $156.61B · Rank #34 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $23.94T · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Nebraska Real GDP history
PeriodNebraskaCompare
2014$115.65B
2015$119.64B
2016$121.3B
2017$123.22B
2018$125.47B
2019$127.48B
2020$127.15B
2021$136.14B
2022$140.03B
2023$151.64B
2024$154.59B
2025$156.61B

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 · $38.06BHigher value · $3.43TStriped: 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 · $156.61B2025 · Rank #34 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
Real GDP · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California$3.43T—
#2Texas$2.33T—
#3New York$1.89T—
#4Florida$1.38T—
#5Illinois$948.03B—
#6Pennsylvania$815.87B—
#7Ohio$738.49B—
#8Georgia$719.74B—
#9Washington$715.88B—
#10New Jersey$688.76B—
#11North Carolina$682.83B—
#12Massachusetts$640.79B—
#13Virginia$631.98B—
#14Michigan$575.4B—
#15Colorado$452.78B—
#16Arizona$451.49B—
#17Tennessee$447.66B—
#18Maryland$437.37B—
#19Indiana$422.47B—
#20Minnesota$392.31B—
#21Wisconsin$363.84B—
#22Missouri$362.46B—
#23Connecticut$297.35B—
#24South Carolina$287.16B—
#25Oregon$264.75B—
#26Louisiana$263.89B—
#27Alabama$259.46B—
#28Utah$243.04B—
#29Kentucky$239.51B—
#30Oklahoma$216.31B—
#31Nevada$210.1B—
#32Iowa$204.86B—
#33Kansas$178.51B—
#34Nebraska · your comparison$156.61B—
#35Arkansas$147.93B—
#36Mississippi$123.37B—
#37New Mexico$122.58B—
#38Idaho$103.62B—
#39New Hampshire$99.06B—
#40Hawaii$93.38B—
#41Delaware$89.92B—
#42West Virginia$84.94B—
#43Maine$77.23B—
#44Rhode Island$67.25B—
#45North Dakota$65.27B—
#46Montana$61.08B—
#47South Dakota$59.87B—
#48Alaska$56.34B—
#49Wyoming$40.16B—
#50Vermont$38.06B—

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

What makes up Nebraska GDP?

Choose an industry to compare Nebraska’s output with every state. Nominal industry values can be added within a year.

Nebraska · 2025$10.6B
Nebraska rank#4among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$255.93BSame 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.

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output

Industry value added, current dollars. The broad industries listed form an exhaustive partition of total GDP.

A large industry output rank can reflect the size of the state. Chained-dollar components should not be added.

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
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output history in Nebraska$-37.69B$149.49B$336.67B20142025
2025 · Nebraska: $10.6B · Rank #4 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $255.93B · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Nebraska Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output history
PeriodNebraskaCompare
2014$8.63B
2015$7.95B
2016$6.9B
2017$5.5B
2018$5.82B
2019$6.49B
2020$6.42B
2021$10.47B
2022$10.18B
2023$12.16B
2024$9.96B
2025$10.6B

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 · $164.2MHigher value · $50.67BStriped: 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 · $10.6B2025 · Rank #4 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
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California$50.67B—
#2Texas$16.95B—
#3Iowa$14.1B—
#4Nebraska · your comparison$10.6B—
#5Illinois$9.52B—
#6Florida$8.33B—
#7Washington$8.05B—
#8Minnesota$8.01B—
#9Indiana$7.13B—
#10South Dakota$7.08B—
#11Kansas$7.02B—
#12Ohio$7B—
#13Wisconsin$6.58B—
#14Oregon$6.18B—
#15Michigan$6.02B—
#16Missouri$5.71B—
#17North Carolina$5.55B—
#18Idaho$5.41B—
#19Pennsylvania$4.97B—
#20North Dakota$4.71B—
#21Georgia$4.53B—
#22Oklahoma$4.26B—
#23Arkansas$4.13B—
#24Kentucky$3.75B—
#25New York$3.55B—
#26Alabama$3.29B—
#27Mississippi$2.99B—
#28Colorado$2.98B—
#29Arizona$2.85B—
#30Montana$2.49B—
#31Louisiana$2.42B—
#32Virginia$2.37B—
#33Tennessee$2.01B—
#34New Mexico$1.7B—
#35South Carolina$1.63B—
#36Utah$1.59B—
#37Maryland$1.31B—
#38New Jersey$1.27B—
#39Maine$1.2B—
#40Wyoming$888.5M—
#41Massachusetts$869.6M—
#42Delaware$741.1M—
#43West Virginia$561.8M—
#44Hawaii$553.9M—
#45Nevada$551.2M—
#46Vermont$536.1M—
#47Alaska$488.1M—
#48Connecticut$341.8M—
#49New Hampshire$320.1M—
#50Rhode Island$164.2M—

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

Does growth translate into more work?

BEA’s total employment counts jobs, including proprietors, rather than distinct people.

Nebraska · 20251,410,465
Nebraska rank#36among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark218,324,700Same 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.

Total employment · jobs

BEA annual total full-time and part-time employment, including proprietors. One person can hold multiple jobs.

Separate from residence-based civilian employment in BLS LAUS and from nonfarm payroll employment.

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
Total employment · jobs history in Nebraska-31,272,965109,803,976250,880,91720142025
2025 · Nebraska: 1,410,465 · Rank #36 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 218,324,700 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Nebraska Total employment · jobs history
PeriodNebraskaCompare
20141,283,252
20151,303,753
20161,312,152
20171,319,307
20181,332,795
20191,331,516
20201,309,889
20211,339,694
20221,363,446
20231,390,444
20241,408,362
20251,410,465

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 · 439,349Higher value · 25,407,891Striped: 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 · 1,410,4652025 · Rank #36 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
Total employment · jobs · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California25,407,891—
#2Texas20,639,097—
#3Florida15,174,955—
#4New York13,498,360—
#5Illinois8,197,037—
#6Pennsylvania8,150,272—
#7Ohio7,394,537—
#8Georgia7,184,433—
#9North Carolina6,864,520—
#10New Jersey6,095,348—
#11Michigan5,946,187—
#12Virginia5,789,397—
#13Massachusetts5,020,627—
#14Washington4,879,224—
#15Tennessee4,633,711—
#16Arizona4,455,141—
#17Colorado4,231,488—
#18Indiana4,213,622—
#19Maryland4,009,451—
#20Missouri3,998,549—
#21Minnesota3,914,167—
#22Wisconsin3,855,203—
#23South Carolina3,245,739—
#24Alabama2,966,686—
#25Louisiana2,831,737—
#26Kentucky2,718,290—
#27Oregon2,671,758—
#28Oklahoma2,466,719—
#29Utah2,458,247—
#30Connecticut2,424,541—
#31Nevada2,163,825—
#32Iowa2,122,389—
#33Kansas2,007,083—
#34Arkansas1,811,561—
#35Mississippi1,713,294—
#36Nebraska · your comparison1,410,465—
#37Idaho1,238,642—
#38New Mexico1,183,906—
#39New Hampshire942,254—
#40Hawaii925,451—
#41West Virginia910,570—
#42Maine898,379—
#43Montana761,061—
#44Rhode Island690,505—
#45Delaware678,218—
#46South Dakota665,420—
#47North Dakota605,276—
#48Alaska472,008—
#49Wyoming451,906—
#50Vermont439,349—

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 GDP, economic growth and production 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.

10 statements from 7 candidates

2026 Nebraska Governor — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 2 statements

Jim Pillen

2 statements

Republican · Governor · NE

Economic growth & production context

2. Our high property tax rates make Nebraska less economically competitive than our neighbors. Reducing property taxes is essential to attracting new residents, retaining current ones, and encouraging business development – all of which will foster stronger economic growth for Nebraska.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Here’s why I feel so strongly about fixing our broken system

Government-published candidate material

2. Our high property tax rates make Nebraska less economically competitive than our neighbors. Reducing property taxes is essential to attracting new residents, retaining current ones, and encouraging business development – all of which will foster stronger economic growth for Nebraska.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Jim Pillen — official Nebraska office primary source 10 ↗
View 1 more statement from Jim Pillen
Economic growth & production context

5. High property taxes discourage people from living in Nebraska and encourage younger people to relocate to other states, harming our population and economic growth. We can’t afford to turn a blind eye to the impact of people who will leave or who won’t move here in the first place.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Here’s why I feel so strongly about fixing our broken system

Government-published candidate material

5. High property taxes discourage people from living in Nebraska and encourage younger people to relocate to other states, harming our population and economic growth. We can’t afford to turn a blind eye to the impact of people who will leave or who won’t move here in the first place.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Jim Pillen — official Nebraska office primary source 10 ↗

2026 Nebraska Secretary of State — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 2 statements

Sarah J. Slattery

2 statements

Democratic · Secretary of State · NE

Economic growth & production context

Driving Economic Development: Faster, simplified licensing processes attract small businesses, encourage new ventures, and directly stimulate local job creation.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Economy, jobs, taxes, and affordability

Candidate campaign source

Driving Economic Development: Faster, simplified licensing processes attract small businesses, encourage new ventures, and directly stimulate local job creation.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Sarah J. Slattery — candidate-owned primary source 5 ↗
View 1 more statement from Sarah J. Slattery
Economic growth & production context

As Secretary of State, I will bring that exact business-minded approach to Lincoln to modernize our operations and support economic growth.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Government operations and public services

Candidate campaign source

As Secretary of State, I will bring that exact business-minded approach to Lincoln to modernize our operations and support economic growth.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

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

2026 Nebraska U.S. House — District 2 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 2 statements

Brinker Harding

2 statements

Republican · U.S. House District 2 · NE

Economic growth & production context

Grow our economy, increase wages, and keep inflation in check

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Affordability

Candidate campaign source

Grow our economy, increase wages, and keep inflation in check

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026

Brinker Harding — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
View 1 more statement from Brinker Harding
Economic growth & production context

Grow the economy, increase wages, and keep inflation in check.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Economic Affordability

Candidate campaign source

Grow the economy, increase wages, and keep inflation in check.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026

Brinker Harding — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 2
How statements are selected

This section matches specific GDP, economic growth and production 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.

2 matching sponsorships or proposals · 2 Nebraska incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Barry DeKay

Nebraska Senate, District 40 · –NE

1 proposal
View proposals from Barry DeKay
Nebraska Legislature · LB 1261

Conditional eminent-domain protection for large-load private generation

Apr 14, 2026 · Approved by governor April 14, 2026

Barry DeKay · Introduced by request

Reviewed complete enacted law

Governor Jim Pillen approved LB1261 on April 14, 2026. Senator Barry DeKay introduced it at the governor’s request; the enacted heading also names Holdcroft and F. Meyer. The June 2 event was a ceremonial signing. The current official version of section 70-670 lists July 18, 2026 as its effective date. The new subsection protects a privately owned generation facility from acquisition by eminent domain by consumer-owned utilities only when it serves an industrial customer at a single site with new electric load greater than 1,000 megawatts and meets every stated condition. It is not limited by its text to data centers, and the threshold excludes a load of exactly 1,000 MW. The facility must be on or adjacent to the customer’s site, have an electrically equivalent grid-interconnection point and receive Nebraska Power Review Board approval. The private supplier, local retail utility, applicable wholesale supplier responsible for regional resource adequacy, and applicable transmission owner must execute the required long-term commercial agreement. The utility governing bodies must approve the contract. It must preserve retail-service and applicable wholesale contractual rights, provide benefits acceptable to the utilities, prohibit the industrial customer from reselling electricity and waive eminent domain over the generation assets for the contract’s duration. The industrial customer must pay all project-related costs, fees, congestion fees and electric-system upgrade costs incurred by covered utilities. Generation may serve only that customer unless the contracting utilities approve a waiver through their governing bodies. Eligible contracts must be entered into on or before December 31, 2031; that cutoff does not make every contract or the whole law expire that day. The new protection is subsection (5); the carried-forward powers and exceptions in subsections (1)–(4) are not all new LB1261 provisions. The current statute also incorporates LB1010’s storage amendment. LB1010’s complete enacted original and the correlated storage amendment have now been reviewed separately. The verified current identities of Rick Holdcroft and Fred Meyer, whose names appear on LB1261’s heading, do not establish primary LB1261 sponsorship. Other underlying acts, subsequent instruments and actual implementation remain separate reviews. These sources do not establish a completed project, a utility rate reduction or an end to data-center incentive eligibility. The protection concerns generation serving a single industrial site with more than 1,000 MW of new load. It is industrial investment policy context; no facility construction, realized investment or GDP gain is verified.

Approved April 14, 2026; enacted provisions verified. Provision-specific commencement, later changes and implementation remain separate.

Why this record is included

The protection concerns generation serving a single industrial site with more than 1,000 MW of new load. It is industrial investment policy context; no facility construction, realized investment or GDP gain is verified.

Retained Nebraska evidence context: energy · reviewed policy context · cpi · reviewed policy context · real-gdp · reviewed policy context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Governor Jim Pillen approved LB1261 on April 14, 2026. Senator Barry DeKay introduced it at the governor’s request; the enacted heading also names Holdcroft and F. Meyer. The June 2 event was a ceremonial signing. The current official version of section 70-670 lists July 18, 2026 as its effective date.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Tom Brandt

Nebraska Senate, District 32 · –NE

1 proposal
View proposals from Tom Brandt
Nebraska Legislature · LB 1010

Large-load electricity standards, storage regulation and tax rules, and data-center reporting

Apr 14, 2026 · Approved April 14, 2026; changes effective July 18, 2026

Tom Brandt · Sponsored

Reviewed complete enacted law

Governor Jim Pillen approved LB1010 on April 14, 2026. Senator Tom Brandt is its recorded primary introducer. The official history posted the approval entry on April 17 but expressly says approval occurred April 14; the enacted heading agrees. LB1010’s changes became effective July 18, as documented by the reviewed codified sections. Approval, effectiveness and implementation are distinct. The new Large Load Customer Regulation Act applies to a retail customer requesting a new or expanded interconnection whose total load at one site would exceed 20 megawatts. Exactly 20 MW does not meet that threshold. This differs from both the data-center definition’s peak demand of at least 10 MW and LB1261’s protection for generation serving new industrial load greater than 1,000 MW. Public power suppliers must establish interconnection standards including protected disclosure of competing requests, disclosure of onsite backup generation, site control and financial commitments. Initial studies require the greater of $50,000 or $1,000 per MW; additional capacity requests after the study require an additional fee based on the new request. Studies must be completed within one year after the fee is received. Suppliers may negotiate rates and operating standards that allocate costs and mitigate resource and financial risks to other customers, and must develop demand-response and emergency curtailment or backup-generation procedures. These powers do not verify any actual rate reduction. Qualifying onsite backup generation must be at least 1 MW and satisfy one of two stated conditions: inability to operate parallel with the grid for more than one-tenth of a second, or continuous parallel operation that is non-exporting and meets applicable interconnection requirements. The enacted definition does not require backup capable of serving 50% of onsite demand. The law adds storage to district eminent-domain scope and cooperative powers, and defines energy storage and associated renewable-facility storage. Associated storage must be on the renewable facility’s premises, primarily store its production, and keep aggregate output within that facility’s nameplate capacity. Reactive-power-only equipment and equipment solely providing electric energy for vehicles are excluded from the storage definition. Private storage requires Power Review Board approval before construction or acquisition, evidence of a contract for all energy and capacity maintained throughout operational life, the specified supplier consents and a joint transmission development agreement. The agreement governs construction, ownership, operation and maintenance, and private construction of needed improvements is at the private supplier’s cost. The law does not force a utility into a joint project or authorize private retail sales, distribution facilities or eminent domain. The storage-protection subsection retains the printed phrase “associated energy resource”; its relationship to the separately defined term remains a clarification question. Storage is added to applicable military-proximity certifications, termination reporting and enforcement. The military-equipment rules retain compliance exemptions and a Board-preapproval exception with stated findings. Terminating an approved project requires a reasons filing within 30 days; the Board’s hearing is advisory and does not approve or deny termination. These provisions do not eliminate contract-breach claims or establish a new criminal offense. A data center under the amended electricity section must meet the stated digital-service and equipment conditions and have peak demand of at least 10 MW. Suppliers may require fair and reasonable infrastructure-cost payments or terms protecting other retail customers, after a load study. Planned facilities must notify their local supplier and meet its interconnection requirements. Data-center owners or operators must report annually by September 30 to the Department of Water, Energy, and Environment and the Legislature’s Natural Resources Committee. The report covers ownership, size, location, electricity demand, water use, tax exemptions, incentive payments, efficiency and conservation measures, renewable-energy commitments and service life. They must bear decommissioning costs and enter community benefit agreements with affected communities. The existing crypto-operation website-reporting and interruption provisions are not blanket data-center requirements. An energy storage resource with nameplate capacity of at least 100 kW is subject to the annual $3,518-per-MW nameplate capacity tax on commissioned capacity, with the stated public-ownership/operation and customer-generator exemptions. The source measures alternating-current capacity in MW, not stored energy in MWh. Depreciable storage personal property subject to this tax is exempt from the depreciable-personal-property tax. This is not an exemption for every tax or every property associated with a storage project. Storage enters the existing tax reporting, proration, payment, penalty and county-remittance framework. Its presence or supporting infrastructure cannot be a factor in valuing or classifying underlying or adjacent real property under the stated section. Receipts are nonrestricted funds for the first five years after commissioning; that status does not waive the tax for five years. The county treasurer distributes 5% of these receipts to the community-college area where the storage resource is located and the remainder to eligible local taxing entities using the statutory levy fractions. The 5% rate already applied to qualifying renewable facilities; LB1010 extends it to storage. The law retains the prohibition on Department of Revenue retention for General Fund allocation. It does not verify actual collections, college spending or a state-debt effect. The February fiscal note addresses the introduced storage bill. The March revision addresses AM2422 and AM2387 and forecasts zero state-agency revenue and expenditure in its four-year table, while explicitly leaving the amount and timing of local taxing-district revenue effects uncertain. Power Review Board cost estimates and the State Electrical Division’s assessment concern their own agency scope. These are estimates, not proof of no local impact or actual spending; final enacted numbering and provisions control over the earlier note’s section descriptions. The current official 13-518 text also correlates LB1114 changes operative April 17, and 77-202 combines LB1010 with LB1114 and LB901 changes stated to become operative January 1, 2027. This review attributes only the storage addition verified in LB1010; it does not treat every consolidated-page difference or future-operative change as LB1010 policy already in force. The complete correlated acts and applicable historical versions still require separate review. The complete enacted LB1010 does not expressly impose a blanket ban on data-center incentives. Its reporting provisions require disclosure of exemptions and incentive payments. This does not resolve the separately retained Order26-17 announcement-versus-signed-original discrepancy, or prove an application was approved, denied or paid. Large-load business development, financial commitments and private storage/data-center infrastructure rules provide investment and production policy context. No completed plant, realized investment, output gain or employment outcome is verified.

Complete enacted provisions and July 18 effective dates verified. Approval posted April 17 expressly records April 14 approval. Implementation and correlated-law review remain separate.

Why this record is included

Large-load business development, financial commitments and private storage/data-center infrastructure rules provide investment and production policy context. No completed plant, realized investment, output gain or employment outcome is verified.

Retained Nebraska evidence context: energy · reviewed policy context · income-taxes · reviewed policy context · education · reviewed policy context · deficit-debt-interest · reviewed policy context · cpi · reviewed policy context · real-gdp · reviewed policy context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Governor Jim Pillen approved LB1010 on April 14, 2026. Senator Tom Brandt is its recorded primary introducer. The official history posted the approval entry on April 17 but expressly says approval occurred April 14; the enacted heading agrees. LB1010’s changes became effective July 18, as documented by the reviewed codified sections. Approval, effectiveness and implementation are distinct.
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.