Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Just Asking Questions
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password
Reason logo

Reason's Annual Webathon is underway! Donate today to see your name here.

Reason is supported by:
A. Tuchman

Donate

Nebraska

Libertarian State Sen. Laura Ebke of Nebraska Loses Re-Election Bid

Running a campaign that stressed small-government values over the Libertarian Party label, the incumbent was still unable to prevail.

Brian Doherty | 11.7.2018 8:20 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Nebraska state Sen. Laura Ebke won office in 2014 as a Republican, but switched parties to Libertarian in 2016 because of her dislike for lockstep discipline in a party that she didn't think hewed to consistent small government principles.

Facebook

After coming in second in a three-way nonpartisan primary in May, with 33 percent for Ebke and 44 for Republican Tom Brandt, she lost to him tonight, 57–43.

Ebke was extraordinarily well-funded for a state legislative race in Nebraska. Due largely to big-money contributions from out-of-state libertarians, she raised nearly a quarter million, huge by Nebraska standards and more than twice Brandt's take. Her district, the 32nd, had around 22,000 potential voters—spread over 37 "towns and villages and a lot of farms," she said in a phone interview last month. Ebke is a college teacher, Brandt a farmer who had never before held office.

Ebke's campaign used electoral software from i360 to keep track of voters and their stated interests and concerns, allowing for such options as "if someone is tagged as being strongly pro–Second Amendment or whatever, we can target special last-minute letters or calls." As far as Ebke knew, "It's rare for a state legislative campaign to get this sophisticated, but we felt we needed to." She or her volunteers had knocked on about 3,000 doors as of a couple of weeks ago.

The Libertarian Party didn't put a lot of effort or time into Ebke's race, which seems fine with her. She wasn't stressing the party connection much in her campaigning or messaging; unless a voter directly asked her, she wasn't apt to bring it up. She says that she was dinged a fair amount for turning coat on the GOP in the primary, but not so much in the general election. The state Republican Party had preferred the third candidate who got knocked out in the primary to Brandt, she says, so she didn't see the string of Republican-funded mailers against her that dogged her in that primary. Brandt, in Ebke's view, is not himself hugely popular with the state GOP, being neither a supporter of Gov. Pete Ricketts nor a conventional small-government type—he's "for Medicaid expansion and for state funding for rural broadband."

Brandt's appeal, she thinks, was more an everyman farmer kind of thing, "wearing a T-shirt all the time and carrying around cinderblocks." At one of their two debates (she wanted to do at least three more public debates, but Brandt refused) he slammed her for being a mere academic vs. his working man.

While she didn't make a big deal out of her party affiliation, she found "a lot of voters know, and most don't care. Every once in a while, you find someone who tells me to go away at the door, that they 'don't like people who change their minds.' This is a fairly conservative area, and I'd focus on telling people I think government spends too much and regulates too much and those things make us less free. If people agree on that, the party is extraneous."

Her campaign manager, Asa Bryant, agreed in an interview last month that trying to sell a voter on the entire L.P. package was less useful to them in a local campaign than just trying to sell the candidate. So he advised Ebke not to stress the party label and not to use the term libertarian in her promotional material; Bryant thought that the party switch would end up "a neutral thing that doesn't help us and doesn't hurt us."

Ebke found on her visit to the Libertarian Party national convention—held at a very inconvenient time for candidates running local races, around the fourth of July—that too many Libertarians seemed more interesting in "fighting with each other about who's the real Libertarian." She adds that debates about, say, totally abolishing public schools were irrelevant to candidates trying to win state elections.

She had six people other than her doing door-to-door campaigning at least two days a week, some four or five a week. She had a professional campaign manager and consultant. Her team were more "Laura Ebke people" than L.P. people, finding that "the L.P. folk are very well-intentioned but many of them need training" in retail politics in a state like Nebraska, throwing around radical rhetoric when simple campaign messaging is called for. "They don't understand they don't have to be full-blown libertarians all the time," she says.

While the L.P. did "send out canvassing teams in the primary," in the general election there was not much coming from them. "They have shifted their efforts. We professionalized our team and they saw us as less needy." The state L.P. was occasionally good for volunteers, but they have no money for campaign support.

She did have teams of uncoordinated canvassers from Young Americans for Liberty on the ground for her, a group that more often supports liberty-oriented Republicans. The out-of-state money and volunteers became a Brandt talking point against Ebke.

Ebke clearly found aspects of contentious politics wearying and annoying, noting in a final pre-election note on her campaign Facebook page that she and her opponent both "have been wounded. And both of us will take a little while to heal. Competitive political campaigns tend to take on a life of their own, with supporters, consultants, campaign managers, and others pushing us in directions we might not go, were it not campaign season." This was likely a personal reaction to her campaign feeling it necessary to do some direct attacks on Brandt.

Prior to the election, Ebke wasn't prone to hyping her legislative priorities for her second term, suggesting those who did so tended to not understand the difficulties and complications of the committee process in the Nebraska legislature. But in her first term she shepherded a bill that is now being used as a national model for occupational licensure reform, which among other things makes it easier for those who may have spent time in the penal system to get productive work. On Facebook, she points out that in her first term she also

introduced bills that would completely eliminate some taxes (LB789 in 2018); bills which would significantly reduce inheritance taxes (LB 936 in 2016); bills that have passed which increase transparency and accountability in bonding (LB 132 in 2015). I've introduced bills which would protect your 2nd Amendment Rights (LB 184 in 2015, and LB 289 in 2015)….I also worked with a constituent in Lancaster County to pass (via amendment into the HHS priority bill) a law which now allows for mobile cosmetology and barber salons (LB 790 in 2018).

I have co-sponsored bills which would limit the ability of the state to violate your constitutional rights—including a bill (which passed) seeking to limit the ability of the state to seize assets without a conviction (LB 1106 in 20115).

In reviewing the bills that I've introduced and co-sponsored, I've not introduced or passed anything which would cost citizens more money (increase costs), and in some cases, my bills would actually decrease the tax burden on citizens. I'm proud of my record as a small government conservative, who has tried to protect your wallet, and your liberty.

That record, and her national support, were not enough for a win. I expect Nebraska will have reason to regret not having Ebke's unique viewpoint in their legislature.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Brickbat: The Twelve Chairs

Brian Doherty is a senior editor at Reason and author of Ron Paul's Revolution: The Man and the Movement He Inspired (Broadside Books).

NebraskaElection 2018Third PartiesLibertarian Party
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Show Comments (5)

Webathon 2025: Dec. 2 - Dec. 9 Thanks to 803 donors, we've reached $539,844 of our $400,000 $600,000 goal!

Reason Webathon 2023

Donate Now

Latest

Why I Support Reason with a Tax-Deductible Donation (and You Should Too!)

Nick Gillespie | 12.7.2025 8:00 AM

Trump Thinks a $100,000 Visa Fee Would Make Companies Hire More Americans. It Could Do the Opposite.

Fiona Harrigan | From the January 2026 issue

Virginia's New Blue Trifecta Puts Right-To-Work on the Line

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 12.6.2025 7:00 AM

Ayn Rand Denounced the FCC's 'Public Interest' Censorship More Than 60 Years Ago

Robby Soave | From the January 2026 issue

Review: Progressive Myths Rebuts the Left's Histrionic Takes

Jack Nicastro | From the January 2025 issue

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

HELP EXPAND REASON’S JOURNALISM

Reason is an independent, audience-supported media organization. Your investment helps us reach millions of people every month.

Yes, I’ll invest in Reason’s growth! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREEDOM

Your donation supports the journalism that questions big-government promises and exposes failed ideas.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks